I picked up the play after teaching at a school named after St. Thomas More. Although I'm not positive that I received a historically accurate picture of who the man was, I don't care. I will add the character of Thomas More to my list of heros and role models taken from fiction (along with Atticus Finch).

I see many high school students have written reviews against the piece, but I think they are the age group that most needs to hear it's message: follow your conscience. In the end, it wasn't the King or even the Pope that More was most loyal to, but his own sense of right and wrong. To quote another famous, English play: "To thine own self be true."

Besides which, More chose to resist in the least conflicting way. He didn't lash out and condemn everyone for going along with the king. He silently refused to comply. Granted, he was trying not to get his head cut off, but still, his example of righteous living rather than righteous blabbing is something we all need in our quest for tolerance and peace.

Please don't make students read this book! Being part of an assignment is enough to ruin any literary work for the reader, no matter how great. I first read this play while in Grade 10 (two years ago), without being forced, and I relished every word from beginning to end. It was so engaging and enjoyable that I couldn't put it down, and I actually laughed aloud and cried several times while reading it after classes and on the bus. This play got me interested in Renaissance English history, and I have learned a lot since then which I can relate to characters and events in A Man for All Seasons.

There is the criticism that Bolt made Sir Thomas unrealistically good and considerably more tolerant than he actually was, but Bolt admits this himself in the introduction included with the edition I read. In this play, historic events and of Sir Thomas More's personality are taken and molded slightly to provide a demonstration of one's man dedication to his faith and his conscience. The dialogue is brilliant, the characters are well realized (within the heroic structure for which Bolt was aiming), and--despite what some may consider a boring premise, certainly not me--the plot and issues are fascinating. It really made me think, and I've come back and read it several times when I feel like I need an idea to ponder. A marvellous play to see performed as well, especially when there is a very capable actor in the title role.

Sir Robert Bolt's " A Man For All Seasons" is a familiar story, but Bolt's telling of it is always fresh. The motion picture version won 6 Academy Awards in 1966 including "Best Screenplay" (Bolt), "Best Actor" (Paul Scofield), Best Director (Fred Zinneman), and finally "Best Picture". The story is set against King Henry VIII's break with Rome, made necessary by his desire to divorce Catherine and marry Anne Boleyn. When Sir Thomas More refused to sign the Act of Supremacy, he was brought to trial on trumped-up charges and ultimately beheaded. More had sought refuge in the letter of the law, but he was required to state his approval of the Act in an oath --an oath which would have required him to state something that he did not believe. For More, an oath was an invitation to God to act as witness and judge. In existentialist terms, the oath would have shattered his integrity, his humanity, that "...something within himself without which life is meaningless." Contrast More with the character, Lilly, of "The Grifters", a modern character who finds fewer and fewer things that she is unwilling to do. She will make any compromise to survive, including the attempted sexual seduction of her own son. In the end she kills him, and escapes the bloody crime scene in an elevator going ominously down...down...down. Both plays: "A Man For All Seasons" and "The Grifters" are about the "self" and express the Jean Paul Sartre view that "man" alone among the animals is capable of inventing himself.

"Spark Notes A Man For All Seasons" was not condensed, but was merely the play reworded. Granted that it did help decipher hidden meanings behind some of the dialogue, or certain innuendo's which can go over one's head, but other than that, it was not helpful or insightful. I think it actually took me longer to read the Spark Notes, than the actual play itself. If you do get this book, of course you know to read "Spark Notes A Man For All Seasons" AFTER you have read "A Man For All Seasons: A Play in Two Acts." I do not recommend.