Anselm Atkins, Gene A. Barnett, William J. Free. “A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS.” : Modern Drama, Vol. 10, No. 2, September, 1987, pp. 182-88, : Dalhousie Review 48 (1968): 13-23. [(essay date 1968) In the following essay, Barnett employs the theme of selfhood as a marker for evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of Bolt's plays A Man for All Seasons,Flowering Cherry, The Tiger and The Horse, and Gentle Jack.], Mosaic 14, no. 1 (winter 1981): 51-9.[(essay date winter 1981) In the following essay, Free relates Bolt's Marxist background to his treatment of historical change as a key issue in A Man for All Seasons and State of Revolution.]
Robert Bolt's fame springs from the success of his play A Man for All Seasons. The stage-play was acclaimed in London and the film made his name stand out from among those of the flood of the new men in the theatre. But A Man for All Seasons is not an unexpected success of the playwright, as it is not his first. in A Man For All Seasons Bolt does not make clear his position on the play's moral and historical issues. A Man For All Seasons and State of Revolution contain several common situations that provide their "structure of feeling." First, in neither play is society fixed, stable or known A striking example of the coincidence of opposites has been created by Robert Bolt in his play, A Man For All Seasons. The crude stagehand dressed in satanic black and called the Common Man is an exact shadow of Thomas More, the saint-protagonist. More and the Common Man, who at first sight seem so unfriendly, are two sides of an equation.... Bolt, who is not a Christian in the meaningful sense of the word makes abundantly clear in the Preface that More's most praiseworthy virtue is his tenacious hold on his self.... Bolt has used every artistic device feasible within the limits of a two-act play to model the features of a (supposedly) minor character on those of its central figure. For Bolt the dramatist, the important thing is...