Does Sir Thomas More die because he is too good to live?

1193 Words5 Pages
The society in Robert Bolt’s A Man For All Seasons is one where self-advancement, expediency and pragmatism are more effective means of survival than acting solely in compliance with personal morals and principles. The demise of Sir Thomas More is, in effect, the demise of true morals and loyalty in the society. The Act of Supremacy simply highlights the corrupt nature of the society and the irony that a man of such admirable traits cannot survive while remaining true to himself, ultimately a martyr, renders him ‘too good’ to live and function in society. As More’s morals and sense of self are so closely intertwined “a man’s soul is his self!”, he feels that if any man compromises his own self in betraying their morals and perjures himself then “he needn’t hope to find himself again.” He would not be able to live at peace with himself if he perjured himself and swore to the oath, and hence has no option but to die. “ While More’s humanness is certainly apparent, particularly his idealism- he sees extending his silence to his family as “only a life-line” and is sure he will be safe in the “thickets of the law”- “we shan’t have to use it but it is comforting to have, is nowhere near the questionable traits of expediency and self-advancement as displayed by Richard Rich, his supposed “friend” who ultimately perjures himself to provide fabricated evidence to lead to More’s death “He said ‘Parliament has not the competence.’ Or words to that effect.” More, however is “more sorry for your [Rich] perjury than my peril”, further highlighting his true integrity and the fact that he is above the other members of society- he is thinking of Rich’s soul when he is about to be sentenced to his death, which he knows has been unfairly issued “the law is not an instrument of any kind.” Once realising that in the corrupt society that the court won’t “construe according to the
Open Document