Page 3 of readers' questions on Robert Bolt's
A Man for All Seasons (1960)
66K
-
Links to further replies: moretalk1,
moretalk2,
moretalk4,
moretalk5,
moretalk6
I'm having problems writing an essay
on "Begin your
paper with an explanation (about one page) of the
morality
framework that the play creates."
I can handle the rest of the essay myself, but I just can't figure
out this "framework." I would greatly appreciate any
help.
-
- Re: morality framework that the play
creates
- Well I can overview the morality
framework of medieval Christianity:
- stand for your principles
- be guided by the Church
- tradition is paramount guide
- conscience is central.
- A framework as I understand it is a
system of values, ethics to live by. The medieval synthesis was
integrating life and religion seamlessly. so that human actions
were much more predictable and sanctions much more inevitable too!
(Inquisition)
-
- In the play, Bolt the atheist 'creates'
a More who stands against relativism, compromise, individualism,
self serving and lazy thinking. Thus,
More is a moral exemplar and so a
saint.
- He moves in a world of uncertainty and
finds consolation and focus in the inner court of conscience, the
ultimate court before God.
- For More it was a courageous choice to
side with all he stood for as a
Christian and a lawyer. Henry was
challenging both institutions.
- Greg
-
-
I have been given two topics to write
an essay on but I can't do it.
- > Can you assist me please. First one
- Analyse two major
characters
- > from the play "A Man for All
Seasons" and discuss their
significance
- > to the plot of the play. Second
one- Show how (a) history (b) religion
- > and (c) politics have been
incorporated into "A Man for All Seasons"
- > Thanks for your
assistance.
-
-
- Discuss More and Cromwell
- There is so much to on this read in the
students' questions at
- here,
and here
and here.
-
- I suggest you peruse character analyses
there.
-
- For question 2:
- a. history: the setting for this
showdown.
- the inevitable clash of different
cultures:
- the nation and the church
- the bully and individual
conscience
- the past and the future
- b. Contrast Wolsey and More as two
characters within religion
- the formal and the
personal/genuine
- the compromised visible Church and the
interior court of conscience
- c. politics is it the art of the
possible?
- Cromwell and the
Machiavellian
- More and his defence behind the
Law
- Greg
Meeting Catholic Social Justice
Principleswell all this was organised and formulated last
century
- the basic principles are the same but we
are doing a retro here - applying future principles to the past -
a 20th century formulation to 16th century life situation of one
country! quotes are in italics
-
- 1. Dignity of the Human
Person
- =priority of person's individual
conscience therefore More's right and choice is
absolute
- govt need to deal with people not as
classes abut a individuals with individual rights
-
- 2. Common Good and
Community
- Human dignity can only be realized
and protected in the context of relationships with the wider
society.
- More knew his actions as the most
respected and public person would impact most publicly as
criticism of the king, as reminder of the established principles
in law, as pointer to principles not widespread compromise and
cowardice.
-
- 3. Option for the
Poor
- states that the deprivation and
powerlessness of the poor wounds the whole
community.
- More's repute on this point was
widely acknowledged; he was just and fair as a honest judge. He
did appeals free of charge or at less than cost.he did penance and
gave alms every week regularly; the play refers to some of these
he gave the taximan the cup that was the bribe to him.His table
was open to all; he was jealously betrayed by those he honoured
with his service.
-
- 4.Rights and
Responsibilities
- Human dignity can be protected and a
healthy community can be achieved only if human rights are
protected and responsibilities are met.
- This says it all - More's human rights,
now widely accepted as the basis for common and international law,
were abused.
-
- 5. Role of Government and
Subsidiarity
- The state has a positive moral
function. It is an instrument to promote human dignity, protect
human rights, and build the common good.
- King stripped the monasteries, fought
the civil war just before more's time, king a feudal overlord in a
time of Enlightement. England under Henry oppressed its opponents
eg More.
-
- 6. Economic
Justice
- All workers have a right to
productive work, to decent and fair wages, and to safe working
conditions.
- Catholic Church holds this as does most
people today.Not at issue in the More-Henry conflict. a standing
principle of catholic social justice
-
- 7. Stewardship of God's
Creation
- The goods of the earth are gifts from
God, and they are intended by God for the benefit of everyone.
- Not at issue in the More-Henry conflict.
a standing principle of catholic social justice
-
- 8. Promotion of Peace and
Disarmament
- "Peace is not just the absence of
war. It involves mutual respect and confidence between peoples and
nations. It involves collaboration and binding agreements."
- Henry's economics and politics
(neofeudalism) were regressive only suiting the House of Tudor
above the common good.[feudalism is control of an estate and
here the country by one autocrat Henry was reviving it in England
with his distain of parliament thus
"neo-feudalism."].
-
- 9.
Participation
- all people be assured a minimum level
of participation in the community.
- Was at issue in the More-Henry conflict.
a standing principle of catholic social justice so More resisted
as only he could.
-
- 10.Global Solidarity and
Development
- Accumulating material goods, and
technical resources will be unsatisfactory and debasing if there
is no respect for the moral.
- At issue here the priority of the moral
dimension above all else.
- at issue in the More-Henry conflict. a
standing principle of catholic social justice
-
-
Hi..what a great
site. My question is: More states"...when
statesmen forsake their own
private conscience for the sake
of their public duties...they lead their country by a short route
to chaos."
-
- What characters in this
play illustrate this statement? It can be from either a
positive or a negative angle. (Which really confuses me.) Thanks
for any help you can offer. Thanks, Dale
-
- This is a central statement to do with
the central theme of this play - conscience.
- That is Bolt's point too in confronting
the sexual freedom of the 1960s; he was looking for a hero who
stood on principle.
- More is shown to say that great
statesmen are so because they have (and stick to their) principles
that is, fear of God (the state of England showed there were few
judges even few men like him at the time.)
- Today we might find other principles to
base public decisions on like the common good or right of choice
or harm no on else, etc. e.g., How is Senator Kerry to defend no
abortion as a Christian President??
- I guess too a statesman is said to need
perspicacity: the ability to consider his consequences, to foresee
the results of his decisions and to avert disasters and
immorality; the short route is the limited but easy option; the
longer route is the harder but obviously the more desired and
enduring solution, that is, to grapple with the problems of
conscience and so struggle to be ethical.
- Immorality is easy; the short route, the
opportunist's path; but the (Christian or conscientious )
statesman is not like this as opposed to Cromwell, and more
pertinently Henry getting a divorce.
-
- A negative angle might be a modern view
that no one conscience can impose its will on a population; that
is feudalism, unacceptable in a democratic society.
- More might be right his his times but is
not a model for ours; another paradigm has to be found to assist
the Christian politician to serve his people. He cannot afford to
be whimsical, arbitrary or radical; he must serve his
constitutency but also he has the right to vote or decide a/c to
the policies he put up at election even if they are unpopular or
seemingly partisan.
- How's that for a rambling answer? Hope
this helps.
- Greg
-
- Another question.....how do the other
characters in the play, such as, Cromwell, King Henry , Rich, Meg
relate to the quote sent earlier? How do they illustrate aspects
of More's statement "...when statesmen forsake their own private
conscience for the sake of their public duties...lead their
country to chaos." Thanks again
- Since they are not statesmen (or women)
it does not apply.
- Meg of course is authentic = true to her
conscience
- Rich although not the antagonist (small
fry opportunist) is especially one who has no conscience and so on
this quote would never avert chaos - he lived longer than the
rest!!
- Are you concentrating on that word
'chaos' to describe the kind of consequences Thomas More envisages
and the sort Michel Moore envisages?
- a godless state is one not following the
Gospel mandates
- an arbitrary state is not anchored on
such perennial laws, drifts in the eddies of pressures, ease,
opportunity, aimless, etc.
- after all this standard is almost
impossible to attain; More's own Utopia after all is only an
ideal.
- Greg 2004
-
-
I am supposed to do a comparison paper
comparing a character in the
movie, A Man for All Seasons, and
something in today's
times. I
feel stumped
with this! Do you have any suggestions? If so, they
would be much
appreciated! Thank you so much!
-
- Why not compare More and Archbishop
Romero? See the film "Romero" from the video shop.
- In the film and in history, he was shot
saying mass in El Salvador.
- He stood up for the poor and dared to
criticise the government.
- Many parallels
- driven by religious
convictions
- killed for it
- Church versus State
- saint
- very courageous
- knew what might follow
- Greg
hi i was wondering - a man for all seasons-
norfolk says "the law is mores
golden
calf" what exactly does he mean
by that?
-
- It's common cultural knowledge from the
bible. Aaron's golden calf in the bible was worshipped instead of
the true God. Moses returned from Mr Sinai and melted it down
again.Exodus 32.
-
- An idol replaces what should be. Norfolk
was exaggerating More's literalism with the law, when he was
respecting it as a rule and an institution in itself rather than a
tool for dispensing justice.ie is there room for interpretation
(Bush's "legislating from the bench" in today's news) or must a
judge just apply the penalties like a robot?
- While Norfolk was not a lawyer, as a
member of the inner council he should have known
better:
- if the laws are not upheld, society
would unravel with anarchy.
- holding to the law is the safeguard for
society.
- Henry was tampering with the laws to
suit his own dictatorial purposes
- making it again arbitrary as it was in
ancient chieftain times when the word of the king is the rule of
law (not impartial without fear or favour)
- In your answer, quote More about his
being a forrester in the thickets of the law - he can find his way
through the tangle of laws. which he could and was respected for
being the only honest judge in all of England.
- Greg
-
10 May 2002:What can you tell me about
the topic of
Faith in the play?
- Thanks you very much
-
- Hi Cristobel
- The play is written by an atheist and
his aim was to extol a man of princile.
- Perhaps today he might choose another
character.
- More of course displayed the greatest
faith in his Maker and said so on several occasions.
- Alice has faith his her husband and that
was enormous and nearly equal to More's faith in God.
- Margret believed her father and he
trusted her (faith reciprocated).
- Roper can to believe in his father in
law.
- Others were weak in faith- afriad for
themselves not rusting in a god to serve.
- the common man perhaps the ultimate
realist/sceptic?
- Greg
-
-
Hi Greg I got a question to write an essay on the
theme attitudes to power &
authority as it relates to a Man
For All Seasons and to include in this the theme heroism. I
basically don't have a clue but I'm thinking of going with the
angle of More's response to the King's authority & Rich's
response to authority also and for the heroism More's role as a
hero since he died as a result of his beliefs. Am I on
the right
track? Can you please help me with info to base my essay
on.
-
- Hi Greg, I'm doing an essay on A Man
For All Seasons where I have to
use the themes attitude to
power & authority &
heroism. I'm
thinking of
using More & Rich's attitude to the King & Wolsey. And I'm
going to use
More as the basis of a hero, can you help me with info
&
references to the text to do this.
I'm totally desperate..
-
- Yes More as a hero after the
event
- He was not wanting to be; he was 'a
reluctant hero', doing what was right for him
- look for where he says he is no martyr
to Meg.
- Greg
-
I need some help identifying examples of
the Renaissance
period from the film
- > "A Man for All Seasons." Any help
will be greatly appreciated. Thanks so much!!
-
- Now this is hard. It had kind of
happened with a very few leading scholars.
- Renaissance flourished a generation
later with Elizabeth
- Perhaps talk of More with enlightened
ideas:
- ridding Church of corruption
- community of scholars (e.g.,
communication with Erasmus)
- loosening up of church stranglehold on
thought, etc.?
-
- OR look for romance in the
film
- e.g., Boleyn, Meg and Roper, art?,
dance? customs?
- This is a hard question
- G
-
-
I am doing an essay
on the topic ' do the ends justify
the means' in
the amfas . .
. not sure really how to approach itany help would be much
appreciated
-
- Hi nick
- This play shows two responses to this
moral dilemma:
- Cromwell says yes - ends do justify the
means: king deserves his way, has power any action will do;
pragmatic "flexible"
- More says no - More expects actions to
be moral follow ethical principles
- Also check out previous replies
at
- compromisers,
- machiavellian
- man
of principle
- pragmatism
- every
one has a price
- Greg
-
I am writing an
essay with regard to the different
corruptions: moral, legal,
political, spiritual. Can you comment?
-
- What is corruption? See similar reply
at here.
- the slide from rigidity to laxity in application of
principles?
- the bending of laws for one's own gain?
- taking advantage of circumstances (which you could set in
motion) for self interest/gain.
- a public perception of uncertainty when certainty was
expected/promised?
- Well all of this could be observed to have happened in Henry
VIII's time;
- More stood out against any of it
- legal corruption was mentioned as being rife when
Norfolk said More was the only judge who could not be corrupted in
his judgements in all of England
- spiritual corruption could refer to the bishops' caving
in to Henry's demands, in the Dissolution of the Monasteries Act,
the dismantling of medieval England, the greed or self interest of
the formal church e.g., Wolsey seeking to keep his status and
resolve the moral/political issue meerely as a "diplomatic"
one.
- moral corruption covers all the rest that everyone was
prepared to be less strict that they had been in the execution of
their responsibilities for others for property for rights
etc.
- political corruption you could refer to Cromwell's
bending of the legal proceedings, to his threat of using the rack
on More, of his way of "using" the law to suit his own
purposes.
- Greg
-
2001 November 1st:
- I've written to you before and I thank
you for your last response to my previous question :) I now have
another question that I'd like to ask you . I'm wondering
how does the climate, the
world of nature, the seasons and the time of the
day reflect upon the action
and theme of the drama. Can you please discuss the use made
of each of these in
the play preferably Act I ASAP? Thank
you so much. It'd be very much appreciated!
-
- Note that the passing of the seasons (man for all seasons) is
a theme for Bolt, for one who is both in season and out of favour;
he was constant. The Tower of London is cold dank and miserable
(and indeed it is most forlorn) It would have broken anyone's
health as shown by the film/video.
- Bolt uses time of day but the film exploits it better: David
Lean's cinematography exploits the journey back to Chelsea on the
morning tide after meeting Wolsey,
- and in the covert meeting with Norfolk by the river,
- and the meeting with Chapuys by accident at night,
- and in the long nights with candles mentioned by Meg to
indicate their misery without him in a closed up house. Also More
bade them go by different ships from English ports to escape
probably at night and disguised.
- Greg
-
-
Hello, I have a direct
question with a broad answer in which I must compose an essay on.
- What was More's view of the law?;
God's law and England's law.
Thanks!
-
- More expressed his view of the law very clearly: in the
thickets of the law he is a forrester i.e., he knew its ins and
outs, the subtleties, the precedents, the tricks of theatre beyond
all his peers. He was truthful and correct in this. See how he
corrected Cromwell at this own trial on a point of procedure
- But he was a remarkably honest man and everyone attested to
this.
- No one could fault him: he fasted every week and confessed
regularly.
-
- He expected the medieval synthesis that God's law and
England's law would coincide, the one as the basis and spirit for
the latter. But lo he found that Henry's forces departed from this
medieval nexus
- When the law became arbitrary, he could not fight back
effectively. He stuck to what he knew - he decided to take up a
stand that was basic in English law: qui tacet consentire =
he who is silent consents = not to object is to agree. So. . . in
his view, it follows that he is seen to agree and would they leave
him alone now?) (see also Nixon's 'the silent majority').
-
:I'm having problems
writing an essay on this play. The handout says "begin your
paper with an explanation (about one page) of the
morality framework that the play
creates" I can handle the rest of
the essay myself, but I just cant figure out this
"framework." I would greatly appreciate any
help.
-
- Well to overview the morality framework of medieval
Christianity:
- stand for your principles
- be guided by the Church
- tradition is paramount guide
- conscience is central
-
- In this play, BOLT the atheist 'creates' a More who stands
against relativism, compromise, individualism, self serving and
lazy thinking. More is a moral exemplar and so a saint.
- He moves in a world of uncertainty and finds consolation and
focus in the inner court of conscience, the ultimate court before
God. For More it was a courageous choice to side with all he stood
for as a Christian and a lawyer. Henry was challenging both
institutions.
- Greg
-
-
I was wondering if
you can assist me in my essay. My essay topic is about discussing
the characteristics of pragmatism
and idealism as they function in
the play. If you can just tell me how to start it off it will be
very helpful. Thank you for your time bye..
-
-
- Yes this is a play about competing principles.
- Ideas are dry but this slice of history makes good drama,
embodies this clash.
- Bolt chose to highlight a Man of Principle in an age of
relativity.
- Pragmatism characterises many politicians today in the
compromises of politics and the eddies of events where our
pluralistic system of moral public behaviour makes such clashes
even more pronounced than in More's day. (The sheer uniformity
then would shock us now.)
- Cromwell represents unscrupulous pragmatism, a willingness to
use what ever means is at hand (utilitarianism) to achieve the
immediate end (necessity, the pragma) without consistent
ethical principles - Cromwell's behaviour is both illegal and
barbarous at times.
-
- Opposed to this is idealism the world of ideas that ideas can
govern our lives, that ethical principles govern human actions.
More of course could be typecast as a committed man firm and
stalwart in the world but I hesitate to label More an idealist if
this means he was unaware of the grit and grind of life for
ordinary humans. He was both practical and ascetic (practised in
self control), and so he was not lulled/ consoled / comforted by
ideas but very aware of how his actions and decision would affect
others, and his own fate.
- He was no impractical fool; More was and is a saint for our
times too - someone very aware of the evils of pragmatism.
Cromwell's term "flexible" opposes More's principled stand.
England needed a good dose of heroism!
- Greg
-
- 3 November
2002
- 1) Please explain: 'While More's alive
the King's conscience breaks into fresh stinking flowers every
time he gets up from bed.'
-
- More's presence (and then his very life) became a thorn in the
King's flesh, a silent irritant, a regular reminder of the past, a
major source of legitimacy from the Continent, one who would not
bend. The mention of bed reminds us of the central issue on
Henry's mind - the need for a son and heir; and all this is to
achieve that aim - he failed!
- Catholic Mary Stuart's return to the throne upon Henry's death
seems to justify More too in retrospect.
-
2) Explain Cromwell's problem: ' If I
bring about More's death - I plant my own, I
think'.
- A strange quote - is it from the
play?
- Here Cromwell foreshodow's his own execution of course; he was
put to death for his conniving.
- "plant" seed: peaceful garden of England
- Cromwell might be seeing that the battle of minds, wills will
become a death for death; if the situation became so acute that
l"ive and let live" is no longer the rule, that he too would be in
danger.
- It shows his shrewd chess-like view of events for . . . the
worse!
-
-
I'm supposed to write an formal essay
for the play of A Man of All Seasons. My topic is "What's
the overall message
that Robert Bolt is trying to
get across in
this play?". Can you give me some specific examples from the
play so I can
support my points with the underlying message from Bolt. Thank
you. It's very
much appreciated.
- > Julie
-
- More is a man of principle in an era
getting used to many compromises
- See Bolt's own Preface to read his
intentions in writing this play.
- More's principles (whatever they are
whether social, political, legal, religious in origin or intent)
are no more clearly spelled out than in his final speech at the
Trial.
- He is no stick in the mud but a true son
of the Church, unlike the bishops who caved in and so many others
who feared Henry chose life rather than treason = disagreeing with
the Act of Succession.
- You could paraphrase this
Preface.
- Greg
-
- > I was assigned a project to figure
out what the characters apparent
- > wants were and what
their real
needs were. The characters I have
to do
- > this analysis of are:
- > Sir Thomas More
- > Alice More
- > Margaret Roper
- > William Roper
- > Duke of Norfolk
- > Cardinal Wolsey
- > Thomas Cromwell
- > Richard Rich
- > Henry VIII
- >
- > The definition of
real needs
for this assignment is those
things that
- > satisfy or fulfill our needs or
natural desire. While the definition of
- > apparent wants is those things that
satisfy our wants or acquired
- > desires are things that appear good
to us when we desire them but may be
- > the opposite of what we
need.
- Any help in this project would be
greatly appreciated.
- Thank you,
-
-
- For Rich, 'real' needs are easy to identify: he is fickle and
deceived by present current apparent desires
- But for More far less easy: he was not self deceiving. He
wanted abstract symbols, outcomes, not associated with himself,
his own fate, or name.
- Would you apply real needs to Roper?? Loving Margaret where
real = expressed not hidden.
- For Wolsey: greedy, ambitious. Was he ever fooled about what
he wanted? No. Just a peaceful life that suited his
interests.
- Greg
- Perhaps send me what you write for my comment...
-
- Hi Greg, I have a multi-paragraph essay
due for my English class next week
- > and I was wondering if you could
just start me off. My topic is as follows:
- Many of society's heroes are
characterized by their tremendous physical strength, romantic
appeal, and/or valor in battle. Write a paper which emphasizes
that Sir Thomas More is a rather
unique hero since he was not a
physically robust figure, slew no dragons, and was certainly not a
romantic figure who appealed to fair maidens throughout
England."
-
- > I need to know what makes Thomas
More so
unique
so I can use facts and
- > quotes from the book for my
concrete details. Thanks so much for your help,
- > you're great!! P.S. Your website
was very helpful. Liana
-
- How is it possible that a happy family man, an erudite
scholar, emergent Humanist, an ascetic Christian, a clever lawyer
and a robust humorist who defied his king and became a saint?
Thomas More was no wimp, sought no martyrdom nor looked for pity.
He was indeed a hero of conscience, a man of decision and truly a
man for all seasons. More's courageous stand for individual
conscience still puzzles us today.See also heroism.
-
-
"To what extent is A Man For All
Seasons a modern tragedy and to what extent is Thomas More a
modern tragic
hero." I would be really thanful
to u if i could get some insights from u on this
topic.
-
- It is a modern play of course It is Bolt's revision of history
to suit his purpose (that is itself a
modern event). It is about modern man's dilemmas in the
post modern world; it is Bolt's cry for fixed points in a rapidly
declining moral landscape.
-
- What is a modern tragedy??
- Define tragedy int he classical and Shakespearean sense (fatal
flaw in character) than go on to show modern tragedy (man victim
of unfriendl circumstances, alienated in a uncaring godless
world)
-
- Modern heroes make accommodations but without losing their
lives, without making the ultimate sacrifice I would have thought:
M L King is a modern hero, Nelson Mandela, Mother Theresa
- are moral heroes This More is not a modern hero
- Greg
-
dominant,
alternative, resistant readings
- Tue, 7 Aug 2001
-
- Hi...
- I would really appreciate help on
identifying and justifying the dominant, alternative and resistant
readings.
-
- What I have found so far is that the
dominant reading
refers to the fact that More is a
principled
- individual taking a stand against a
corrupt and self-serving power structure.
-
- The
alternative
reading refers to the fact that
More's stand is not right or wrong as such but is typical
of the conflicts that occur in all
societies during a process of change.
-
- The
resistant reading
implies that More is a dangerous
individual incapable of operating within established frameworks
and hierarchies.
-
- Thanks for your time, and if you are
able to reply please reply to this email address.
-
- Daniel
-
- This looks excellent to me. Well done!
Any ideas anyone? Greg
1. Explain the
conflict of the novel by establishing at what point it begins,
when it climaxes,
- and when it is resolved. Be specific by
providing page numbers. I thought this would be the easiest but it
turns out I can't distinguish any of this except the obvious end!
Please help asap. . thank you
-
- The Play is in 2 Acts that suggests a
dramatic structure/development to a climax.
- Perhaps watch the video of Schofield's
performance and plot the emotional highs? See plan of play
here.
-
- Emotional peaks occur at:
- mounting tension
- rejection
- resignation
- imprisonment
- interrogations
- trial
- execution
- 26/12/02:
Issues about staging the
play: What use does Bolt make of
theatrical
techniques in A man for all
seasons? For example
- - use of staging/lighting -
commonman lit in front of the curtain for scene changes to link
him with audience
- - bleak minimalist set to
emphasis not the gaudy details but the serious issue of
conscience; not a showy play but a serious purpose
play
- - pace sequence contributes to
dramatic climax; draw a plot outline of the play see
here.
- see how the scenes become shorter and
the venues repetitive towards the end
- - language is natural but formal,
correct, elevated,
- - characterisation stilted wooden
all backgrounding More
- - More's humour, religiousness
are not thoroughly developed in the play either
- - use of the alienation device or what
it sets out to be anyway. See other staging issues at my
links:
I have to examine the
techniques
used by Robert Bolt to create effect in his play "A MAN FOR ALL
SEASONS"
- Have a read of information
at:
- chorus
- narrator device
- audience
reactions
- common
man device
- Hope this helps.
-
- There is
dramatic
irony
- when the audience knows something the
character/actor does not
- like Cromwell and Rich plotting is known
and played out but More does not hear them.
- There is irony when the character's
words prove to be prophetic or tell more than the character knows
then there is when one character knows more than another while
talking to him/ them.
-
What is the significance of these
quotes please???
-
- > More: There is
my right
arm. Take your dagger and
saw it from my
- > shoulder, and I will laugh and be
thankful, if by that means I
- can come with Your Grace with a clear
conscience." (p53)
-
- This emphasis on conscience (the
interior courtroom of the soul,
- God's view) is central to this play.
More echoes the Gospel saying that giving up your life and
Paul
- giving your soul to be burned but to
find God. He indicates his extreme willingness to serve the king
in this matter of the Queen Catherine is uppermost on both their
minds, but because More is unable to help Henry get the divorce,
it becomes a matter of conscience for More.
-
- > Steward: My master Thomas More
would give anything to
anyone.
- Some say that's a good and some say
that's bad, but I say he can't help
- it- and that's bad. . . because someday
someone's going to ask him for
- something that he wants to keep; and
he'll be out of practice. (p16)
-
- More is known for his selfless
generosity. Steward fears he would be out of practice in claiming
anything for himself (when he needs to like now) even to protect
himself, his life, As the steward here recognises, that it is
becoming a matter of life and death and More might not be able to
defend his life.
-
- By the way, this is an example of how
the Common Man measures or paces the drama for us.
-
8 July 2001. I have a question, to what
extent is Richard Rich's rise to power and fame in Tudor England
a sad commentary on human
nature when you consider that he
is a "man of knowledge without wisdom, ideals without conviction,
ambition without purposes"?
-
- Q: How sad is it? Answer: somewhat
- Do you mean a sad commentary on Tudor England or on the human
race
- If the first understandable; if the second not
surprising.
- It is not a major commentary on either
- We know humans act like this and Bolt was showing Rich this
way.
- But he was not a man "with ambition but without purposes"
- He as very pragmatic and an opportunist. He is part of the
era's (im) moral wall paper.
- Rich's rise to heights even then is very worrying
- But is it very different today?
- I think not
- Greg
Thu, 23 Aug 2001
- > Can u please help me! I'm stuck on
this assignment for my AP Summer
- > assignment. I have to discuss
Thomas More's moral
dilemma in the
- > play. I have no clue where to start
or what to write. Please help!
-
- I would consider the moral dilemmas for More are:
- loyalty to God or loyalty to friend/King
- save his office or save his soul
- save his repute or lose it
- stand as a rock for the faithful or side like the bishops with
the King
- compromise or pay the price of principle?
- Greg
Roper as an exaggeration of More's
virtues
- Thu, 23 Aug 2001 17:14:46
+1000
-
- > I love your website, it is
extremely easy to navigate and the information available is
amazing. Anyhow, I have a question. I am supposed to write an
essay and show how Roper is an
exaggeration of More's virtues.
I've reread the play a lot of times but need some help on this. If
you could email me back very soon (the essay is due in about two
days) that would be wonderful. Thank you!
-
- Hi thanks for the praise of my site construction!
- Yours is a hard question indeed. I am thinking on my feet
- I may reply again soon after some more thought.
- Roper was able to compromise, e.g. he changed from Lutheran to
marry Meg. More could never do this.
- Roper could believe he held his integrity while doing this;
More could not.. More's strict, ever so strict stand was not
possible for others. Alice was like Roper in this regard. I find
this question forces us to push Roper but he is a minor in the
play. More's virtues of courage, honesty, humility, integrity do
not sit well when considering Roper although he was all these but
not an exaggeration or even a parody of them. He just simply had
them too.
- Greg
5 May 2001 The question is:
"The lord chancellor is not an ordinary subject, he bears the
responsibility for what is done . Explain why More is
unable to bear the
responsibility of his
office."
If you could please help me answer this
question, e-mail me, I would be very grateful , it is due Monday 7th
May . thank you very much Greg.
- Well this is the central issue of the
play recongising the continuing
- right of the pope in these matters is to
deny Henry's assumption of this
- power in England. More just had to take
a stand he felt and this was not
- confrontation but avoidance. In his
silence he believed was his
- protection under the law for the maxim
is qui tacet consentire in
- silence is consent
- More of course could not accommodate
Henry in this matter of the queen
- Bolt's Preface explains it for you
too
- Greg
6 May 2001
- hi greg, Could you please explain how
characters like more "buy a man
with suffering?''
- Explain how More's action in the play
led to his suffering, the ultimate punishment.
- please reply to my e-mail with some help
on this question.thank you very much.
- randy
-
- Suffering as
persuasion is a strongly
practised idea. Nancey Murphy in On the moral nature of the
universe: Theology, cosmology and ethics Fortress Minneapolis
p. 153 lists persuasive techniques. martyrdom and hunger strikes
are primary examples. If you can't persuade by argument, you can
persuade by evoking sympathy by self imposed suffering: starving
faces on TV are another example.
-
- But this is drawing attention to
yourself to get a personal gain; but I do not accept this as
More's historical or Bolt's dramatic intention. More was drawing
attention (by accident mind you, he was not boasting or
Pharisaical) to a long forgotten theological issue which today
sounds more Protestant than Catholic - judgement by individual
conscience.
Tue, 18 Sep 2001
Who is the publican
and what is his role in the play
of "A Man For All Seasons" by Robert Bolt
-
- The publican (inn-keeper) 'refuses' to
understand or accept Cromwell's conspiracy.
- Publicans have to please all customers.
They can afford to have no truck with anyone
- nor doubt the rulers; he represents
typical shopkeepers of London intent on profits . . . and saving
their lives. This is the advantage of anonymity; but this can no
longer be More's.
- See also my page on
common man.
and also
my
reply on similar.
- Greg
-
-
How does the
common man relate to us as
humans?
- > Is there a symbolic
meaning?
- > Thanks
-
- 1. Common =
- ordinary morals (no great heroics, ready to compromise)
- ordinary doubts (distrustful of martyrdom, no big sparks)
- ordinary concerns (staying alive, play it low, be quiet,
offend no prince, obey all laws, protect one's family, find the
next meal, etc.)
-
- 2. Twentieth century is the era of the common man. One
symbolism is that he the Common Man relates to us, the audience,
for
- we identify with him (or at least are meant to)
- we share like him a commoner's view of events, as spectators
on the drama of life , we can relate to it but do not wish to take
part
- our habitual anonymity is our protection too.
- See also my discussion of the common man: click
here. Greg
-
-
Consider the scene in
which King Henry comes to dinner at More's
Chelsea
home.
- a) Compare the response of More and
Alice to King Henry's visit.
- b) Outline the purpose of the King's
visit and show how he sets about achieving this.
- c) Show how More's initial response to
the king's visit prepares us for what will happen later in the
scene.
- please give me some ideas on how to
write this essay!
-
- a. More is wary, tense, silent; Alice is
open welcoming kknowing that it never benefits someone to offend
one's king.
- b. King says his purpose is a casual
visit; he comes to ask for a way through his dilemma in
friendship; he was a goal and now must finds the means; he seeks
Thomas's help.
- c. More is now confronted with the rock
hard dilemma he has; he can find no way through and yet does not
want to offend the king; he never makes false promises; he never
equivocates, vacillates; he just knows that in his terms there is
no agreement possible. He is not socially inept nor a nark nor a
conscientious objector but just unable to help Henry in this
matter of State.
- Greg
24 September
2001:
- > Greg,
- Your site has a lot of useful
information, but I couldn't help
- > but notice that you skipped over
the main symbols in the play which
- > can be the key to understanding
it. In fact I read you site
- > thoroughly and I am almost sure I
did not see mention of any of the
- > 23 major symbols in the book.
I am sure that essay-writers and many
- > other people, including myself,
would be interested in the information
- > you could provide on
the symbolism in Bolt's
play.
Thank-you.
- > Jennifer
-
- Dear Jennifer
- Thanks you for your comments and
observation.
- I would appreciate further discussion
with you.
- e.g, indeed would you list for me "the
23 major symbols" in this play?
-
- My avoidance of discussing symbolism is
deliberate.
- I agree with the Methuen notes p. 89 (
London: 1982 ) that symbolism is not easy for modern readers who
are unacquainted with its use, because the last place it is used
today is in religion.
- Also it is noted there that its use is
inconsistent: e.g., Henry as pilot of the river leading the nation
on a new course while More stands on the land isolated and left
behind.
- But elsewhere the river's eddies and
whirlpools stand (or can be read as) evil, treacherous, dangerous
(beginning Act II).
- That writer notes that Bolt has been
less than successful at it, the only successful and unequivocal
one being the King's Great Ship (of State).
- Rather I think teachers could talk of
imagery and metaphors that transfer meanings much more readily. I
find that students are very unsure how to tag the meanings of
symbols, and are unable to identify misreadings of
symbols.
- Rich's red lion medallion is an
ambiguous symbol: of his own corruptedness for More and of his own
advancement for himself, the silver cup is a symbol of bribery or
the bribe itself?
-
- As far as the symbols must be understood
so as to understand the play, I disagree. Indeed, how conscious
and reflective would a theatre audience be about such symbols
anyway? Classroom examination of plot character and setting
satisfactorily convey the play's meanings in my
experience.
-
- Your colleague
- Greg
-
-
On 4 May 2001
- > Greg, my teacher tried to tell me
that More's tragic
flaw is his excessive
- > pride. Could you give some examples
in the story when he shows this pride??
- > I am having some problems. If not,
could you help me find another flaw
- > for him?
- > thank you
-
- I question the assumption behind this question and answer
here.
- This is the Aristotelian theory of tragedy (i.e. what
Aristotle thought in
- 5th century Greece BC). Shakespeare followed it too.
- BUT modern theories do not assume a fatal flaw in character,
viz.,
- More was swamped by unfriendly circumstances - not suffering a
character collapse but standing up to contrary circumstances in a
storm. It was a tragedy that his world would not support him. His
mistake if one insists is not to compromise himself before his
God. To the end he was a loyal some of the visible, roman Church.
Perhaps his silence was not his friend but his greatest
enemy?
- Greg
- > Hi Greg, our teacher gave us a
most interesting assignment
- > today. For the next week, our
classroom is going to be a mock
- > courtroom. We were placed into
groups and given the tasks of answering
- > this question:
- > "To what degree is the character
responsible for More's downfall in
- > the play?"
- > My group was given the task of
prosecuting Richard Rich and
DEFENDING
Cardinal Wolsey
with this question in mind. While
we DID find some
ways to prosecute Rich, we're having
an EXTREMELY difficult time
defending Wolsey. Any ideas or
pointers would be greatly appreciated!
-
- Yes it would be difficult to defend Wolsey. He criticised More
and More would not side with him.
- More had to keep party with Wolsey simply by respecting his
office as Cardinal and Lord Chancellor together. This is a very
tricky combination at any time, I guess. It created did not solve
problems of State. In reply, Wolsey is not responsible for More's
downfall; it all happened after his death and he left no new
solutions to the issues, nor did he aggravate them.
- Greg
1st May
2001.
Information on
Cranmer's
character please
-
- Dear Malcolm
- I do not have the resources at hand. Search the internet even
the Catholic Encyclopaedia.
- Also see the Dramatis Personae at start of the play. I imagine
you will use words like:
- weasel, convenient, not principled, a minor character (hardly
a foil to More), himself fell into disfavour, flexible Churchman,
opportunist, ambitious, typical of the times, intent on office and
survival.
- Greg
-
27 April 2001.
Hi Greg,
- I have to give a character sketch of
both Alice and
Meg and discuss where they stand
in regards to Thomas' troubles (i.e.. do they support him or not).
I have found some really good quotes but that seems to be it. Your
site is very helpful and informative. If you could get back to me
as soon as possible with any information, I would really
appreciate it.
- Thank you,
- Alison
-
- Hi Alison
- check prrvious replies at
- Margaret
- Alice,
- Meg's
philosophy
-
- Greg
25 Apr
2001
-
- I came across your site while looking
for information for a current essay
- Discuss how a man for all seasons has
represented power relationships
within
- society. Any help would be appreciated.
thank you.
-
- Hi Gareth
- I guess some sociology might help us
find and use categories to discuss power. Perhaps consult a
website?
- I was only today talking in class about
how Henry in this play was an absolute monarch - He had England
terrified for their lives
- No doubt More just had to stand up to
the bully at long last
- This did stick in the King's throat. It
was very much a feudal society and Cromwell an ambitious toady
sought to share power, any kind of power power, as 'the king's
ear'.
- Remember too the fear of civil war that
the Tudors has at least for the time being had delayed/ deferred/
placated.
- Consider too the powerless ones - More
consigned to silence; Alice Norfolk Cranmer even dissenting in
private only. the Parliament (1215 Magna Carta notwithstanding)
also the terrified slave of the King. Remember they all had
witnessed the Dissolution.
- See the scene in the Scofield film where
Cromwell walks in with the New Act and discussion ceases. The
King's Business reigns.
- The 'power' of the Pope was challenged
and More replaces it locally in England with the moral
power.
- Greg
I was wondering if you could explain
to me what a
fair-weather
friend was and 5 people from the
play that
would b considered a fair-weathered friend.
And also how
does the title relate to Sir Thomas More.Thanx!
-
- Norfolk & others are fair weather
friends, that is, they want to know you in good times but not in
bad.
- A good weather friend is with you
"through thick and thin"
- So a man for all seasons is true to his
word, as the marriage vow says
- in sickness and in health until death do
us part. That is the worth of such a man's promise
- Greg see also my
reply to Angel on the play's
title.
-
19 April 2001:
- > Hi! I was wondering if you knew
three good quotes said by Margaret More and if by chance you knew
there importance. Also what is
Margaret's
philosophy? I'm not quite sure I
understand what they are asking. thanks you very much.
- This is a good question. I am only
thinking aloud now and let me think about it later.
- Margaret is a loyal daughter. She is
also educated so More relies on her to understand him
- She does but also cannot support his
decision
- This is probably the most painful
decision he and she have had to make.
- As in the film she agrees to remove the
chain of office from his neck - this means a lot to
More:
- She accepts him in FAITH but does not
share his sheer faith
- She marries Roper. She is love and Faith
personified and also suffers in poverty and
- "disgrace". More seems to be unaware of
these social effects and for this we depart
- from him
- Greg
-
21 April 2001:
- > Dear Greg,
- > For my English Independent, I've
been given this commentary to base a
- > thesis on and am required to
compare A.M.F.A.S. and King Lear. I can choose
- > to either agree or disagree with
it.
- > 'People in all societies
strike a
bargain by which we accept
society's
- > values and moral standards in
exchange for a promise of whatever rewards
- > society offers. However, this
bargain is constantly tested by corruption
- > within and without, as a person's
life and promise are hostages of tainted
- > morality, chance, and the decay of
institutions.
- > Please help me find some
information to base my argument on.
-
- Wow !! This is a frightful topic. Take
each of these tests one by one and show how More met
them
- see also my reply
/ comparison click here.
-
- Yet I do contest the assumption of the
topic, that we strike a bargain. Do we or are we forced? We cannot
get out of society. Is out passivity, our silence (on environment,
etc.) a collusion with society? Is our powerlessness our fault?
These questions are answered in degrees of blame and awareness. So
is the most aware the most to blame?
- More was not into
compromises
- Greg
-
19 April
2001
- Hi, I have written to you before and
this was my topic
- > Robert Bolts' A Man for All
Seasons is an exploration of an
- >
individual's sense of self and its
implications to a wider
social
- > context. Bolt's message to his
audience is best expressed when he says:
- > "A man takes an oath only when
he wants to commit himself quite
- > exceptionally to the statement,
when he wants to make an identity
- > between the truth of it and his
virtue, he offers himself as a
- > guarantee." Respond with
specific reference to the quote using
- > characters, themes and evidence
from A Man for All Seasons.
- >
- > Anyway even though I am still using
oaths as a focal point I am also
- > using individuals, then integrity
and lead up to oaths. I was
- > wondering if you had an idea in
which I could base the theme of
- > individuality on and anything else.
So far I have included the "I
- > believe it" speech and if there are
any other quotes you can think of
- > to use in other parts, any help
would be really, really appreciated.
- >
- > (By the way, thank you for your
site it is really helpful.)
-
- Dear Sian
- Thanks for your thanks and
acknowledgment
- You seem to be going well
- I have picked out quotes of importance
on the website
- The thickets of the law one is also
central
- Congratulations on your
progress
- Perhaps send me a sample paragraph
draft??
- Greg
Help me please
start an essay titled "We have no
choice in the play but to admire
Sir Thomas More."
-
Yes, you/we the audience cannot but
agree. Bolt
directs our sympathy for the central man for all
seasons.
- It is a vote of sympathy and of
admiration too.
- Sympathy is hard to maintain as he goes
beyond what we ordinary people would be prepared to do (we lack
this superhuman courage as a rule).
- He loses everything even his status,
property, his loved ones; the comfort of his religion is is only
standby - what faith he must have had!
- The reader and the audience is also
called to admire him too.
- The role of the commonman is tinged with
this aspect and admiration- quote some of his lines and their
subtext too in this regard
-
- What other responses to the play are
possible?
- Would we reject him for being foolish -
possibly.
- Would we disregard him as being in a
costume drama dealing with affairs unique and beyond what an
ordinary man - and so irrelevent to us in the 2002 world of
terrorism? Possibly.
- Would we just give a big yawn - say the
world is different, the issues are never the same - this would
miss the point surely - there is meat for every man and every
woman here too: We cannot deny his courage to avoid taking the
Oath, the firm conviction of his faith, the willingness to forego
all for this 'conscientious objection' his complete austerity,
impartiality, humility and in the end, his sainthood.
- Greg
Greetings Greg
-- I just want to get your take on how this play relates to this
question: Technology is clear in today's court proceedings, but in
what possible way did technology impact this play, its characters,
even its plot?
- Any help you can give would be
greatly appreciated
-
- What a question!
- (What happened to/what was wrong with
the old fashioned text related questions?)
-
- Technology suggests communications-
Would things have been better or more intensive if Henry had kept
texting More with his demands? To refuse a reply to a text message
is very rude today.
- So how could he have kept his silence? I
guess it would have demanded/shown his diplomacy!
-
- Would better communications have speeded
up the Cromwell hearings process? Perhaps not really - the
persistent refusal would not elicit the reply "read my website to
see what I think!"
-
- Listening devices: To someone like
Cromwell no ethics) no telephone account would be safe from his
inspection. - no secrets between Meg and Alice and More (as if
there were any) More was well aware of this possibility and swore
Alice to say she knew no reason for his silence.
-
- Act 2 Scene ii page 61 Cromwell: "It's
just a matter of finding the right law. Or making
one."
- With internet he might have searched the
world for that law (Rich as a plagiarist jerk).
-
- p53 "but that I believe
[emphasis] it to be true, or rather not that I believe it,
but that I {emphasis} believe it"
- With our flattened sense of the self
today (postmodern malaise and anonymity) and others' suspicions
about the possibilities of ethical altruism triumphing over self
interest, I wonder if More could effectively communicate that
sense of the principled self that Bolt intended? Technology
renders us subject to an unnamed variety of conflicting
influences, so society would be suspicious of an individual
ethical stand asking who's paying him? Religious motivation like
his is today just misunderstood, relegated to mania, or bad mental
health.
-
- Hope that helps , Greg
-
Return to moretalk
6, moretalk
5, moretalk
4, moretalk 2, moretalk
1, plan
of play
- Return to A Man for All Seasons
study site
Site devised and maintained in Brisbane Australia
by
G. Smith Begun May 7th 2001. Revised
27/10/01. Completely non-commerical. This page's eaddress is
http://home.pacific.net.au/~greg.hub/moretalk3.html