A Man For All Seasons by Robert Bolt

Reading about individuals whose ways of life are dramatically different from our own provides readers with fresh insights into their own experiences and ideas. A reader of A Man for All Seasons, by Robert Bolt, may not be accustomed to the actions of the play\'s characters. Though, it is important to figure out and understand why the character reacts or acts as he/she does. This enables the reader to have a new or modified outlook on his/her own actions. If one turns the kaleidoscope of his/her life just a little, the world becomes a different place.
Sir Thomas More lived the type of life that is foreign to many readers. More\'s actions were all based upon two things, his conscience and God. When More is being pressured into signing the oath by Norfolk in the name of fellowship, he replies by saying, " And when we stand before God, and you are sent to Paradise for doing according to your conscience, and I am damned for not doing according to mine, will you come with me for fellowship?"(77). He adheres to his philosophy and conscience, knowing that he will inevitably be executed. One who is reading this may reply by thinking More\'s decision was asinine. The reader may believe that life is the greatest value to man, and to place anything above it would be asinine. More\'s behavior was bizarre even to his own time period. His daughter, Margaret, pleaded for him to sign the oath, "Then say the words of the oath and in your heart think otherwise"(81). Her father could not morally be satisfied by this. More believed that when an oath is taken, one is placing his pledging his self and soul. " When a man takes an oath, Meg, he\'s holding his own self in his own hands. And if he opens his fingers then- he needn\'t hope to find himself again"(81).
On the other hand, Richard Rich\'s actions were not based upon conscience or morality. He would sacrifice his friend\'s life in order to receive a job offer. After Rich testifies, and More learns that Rich was appointed Attorney-General for Wales, he is full of disgust and disbelief when he says, " For Wales? Why, Richard, it profits a man nothing to give his soul for the world.....But for Wales!"(92). Rich can be portrayed as the lowest of life forms. More implies that Rich abandoned his conscience to have a title, which in the whole scheme of things is really insignificant. On that day of judgment, his office will have been long forgotten. It is a man\'s actions during life which determines his direction after life. Rich, among the other corrupt men of the state and church, did not look beyond this world, but only viewed what his present status was. His greed led him to turn down the opportunity to have a decent and honest job as a teacher, because he wanted to be exposed to the bribery of a judicial position, the same bribery More wanted to leave. As Norfolk exclaimed of More, "When was there last a Chancellor whose possessions after three years in office totaled only one hundred pounds and a gold chain"(58). If Rich was given the chance, the total of bribes he would receive would greatly exceed that number.
Thomas More and Richard Rich represent the two extreme boundaries on the spectrum of behavior. More is the ultimate ideal man, and Rich is the example of extreme immorality. While many readers will not fit into either of these categories, it is important to know where one stands. One must envision the range which these two characters set, and scale oneself somewhere between the two. The reader may then try to make inferences into his/her own actions, and attempt to determine why he/she acts. The reader now has some premise from which to view his own actions. These characters provide a convention which sets fixed positions, or denominators, which can be used to measure one\'s morality in his/her actions. In life, insights into one\'s actions can only be gained by seeing and understanding the actions of others through a different point of view. By understanding someone else, one is enabled to compare himself/herself