Discuss the conflict between idealism and materialism in A Man for All Seasons.

I think that the heart of Bolt's drama is the collision
between transcendent idealism and practical materialism.  Sir Thomas More is depicted as
a figure who will not sacrifice his beliefs.  While it would be politically convenient
for More to embrace a civil authority over a sacred one, More refuses to acquiesce to
such a notion.  His idealism compels him to accept death than to sacrifice or mitigate
his beliefs.  The "moral squint" that is described is actually a representation of
idealism that is a constant.  Recall More's admonishment of Roper for abandoning ideals
when times are trying:

readability="7">

More chides Roper for anchoring to his
principles, but pulling up anchor and moving elsewhere when the 'weather turns
nasty."

It is here where More
is a "man for all seasons."  More's idealism makes him unlike the common man, who
benefits as things change and who represents a moral malleability that enables him to
benefit greatly from such pragamatism.  This idealism is also in stark contrast to
Richard Rich, who is more concerned with his own material advancement than any other
moral code.  His perjury compels More to feel worse for him than anything else because
More recognizes in his amorality that there is nothing reflecting the essence of human
identity.  In the end, the moral play that happens in this drama is one where idealism
to collective nobility is challenged and confronted by a world that is increasingly
self- interest based and one that is more pragmatically driven by materialism.  In the
end, the audience must assess what it means to be "a man for all seasons."  While Bolt
feels our world is more contingent and ironic, he seems to be compelling the audience to
ask, through understanding More's character, if this is how consciousness should be as
opposed to what it is.