HELP! with "A Man for All Seasons" SAC

[starbuckscoffee]

Do you have any thoughts on how i can approach this?

[costargh]

Common man
"Better a live rat than a dead lion"

Cromwell
Has no sense of integrity in his actions, interested in promotion and bringing down More

Rich
Self-gain at all costs- breaches his "friendship" with More to climb the social ladder and forge a career
To show more success that integrity, contrast this with the ending of Thomas More. Rich has climbed the social ladder, gained employment and bought exquisite clothes while More who tries to uphold his moral conscience is executed. Which life is more succesful? Do this for the Cromwell and Common man too.

[Collin Li]

Interesting. My view on this, without having any reference to the text, is that it can be beneficial to your self-interest (encompasses success) to have integrity. If you can use textual evidence to support this discussion, it would be a good atypical "yes" or "no" response.

[starbuckscoffee]

Yea i've decided to structure my essay around the CM and Rich then draw comparison as you suggested costargh.

[mark_alec]

You should also mention More and Cromwell. Also discuss that for More, keeping his integrity is in his self-interest (not his family's or country's, though you could argue his country benefits by him dying as a martyr) since his soul will be preserved.

[Amnesiac]

don't base paragraphs around characters, but rather a broad idea.

use characters/themes/issues/literary devices or stage directions to illustrate the point made. I did a similar question to this for my MFAS SAC and i used a lot of examples of how Bolt physically structures the play to present a point of view (one of the four dot points in the assessment criteria). With this topic you could argue that although self interest appears to bring about a worldly interpretation of success (power, position, wealth etc), it is ultimately Bolt's cynicism that men must remain one with their integrity to truely succeed... This is how i would do it.. maybe discuss the various viewpoints/interpretations of 'self interest' and in your contention (and probably a paragraph) it would be wise to explore the concept behind 'succeeding.' Then perhaps base a paragraph around Bolt's contention with More as an example...

just using my knowledge about MFAS to try and help..

[costargh]

There's no reason why you wouldn't base it around characters as this is directly related to the question and illustrates the arguments being made.
Obviously the theme, issues and literary devices are going to be incorporated in any answer (throughout the paragrapghs) but it is most logical to base the essay around the characters. This ensures that your essay flows logically from one point to the next, with clear distinctions between paragraphs instead of getting yourself confused, muddled up with the way mike has explained.

There are obviously some text response essay questions where you would focus on themes but this IMO should definitely be character based and I think most people would approach it this way.
(That's not to say that your essay won't stand out from the others. It's the way you develop your ideas, explain your arguments, your use of textual evidence and maturity in writing which will get you high marks, not necessarily taking an obscure view on an essay question)

[shinny]

Definitely not a character question, just due to the wording of the essay topic. Examiners are often quite picky about it, and if it doesn't specifically ask in the essay topic for a character styled essay (the essay topic doesn't even mention a character name here), don't include character names in the topic sentence of each paragraph. The topic sentence should state the 'broad idea' as mike said, but then you can follow immediately with just a single character if you want because theres probably only one character for each idea who truly epitomises it anyhow.

[costargh]

Meh. It's just my opinion and the way I've been taught but each to their own.

The use of characters is a structure that allows the reader to interpret how selt-interest brings more success than integrity.

[Chocoholic]

I personally do it like costargh. By using the characters you demonstrate how self-interest brings more success than integrity(if that's what your contention is) and you can still include issues and themes. But in the end, whatever approach you use, you are capable of high marks if you demonstrate your knowledge of the text and have a good argument.

[costargh]

Consider this,
There are three men who are each given $100,000. They each decide to use their money they way they see fit.

The first man invests his money, reaping great financial benefits and goes on to live a life full of luxury holidays, boat cruises and expensive living.

The second man is single and saves his money, using it only to pay for basic survival needs as he wants to do the bare minimum in work over the rest of his life and use the money to live off.

The third man gives his money away to charity.

The first and second man went on to live "successful" lives (at least in the short term) while the third man who gave his money to charity soon lost his home (due to unforeseen circumstances) and had no money to live, leading to his death.

Now if I said
"This scenario" shows that self-interest brings more success than integrity. Discuss.

I would presume that most people who focus on the fact that in my scenario there are direct differences in the way these people live their lives which makes them have differnt levels of success.

Note : I realise my scenario is simplistic and not in line with AMFAS but it illustrates my point that when there are such clear distinctions in a text/scenario that directly relate to the essay question it seems logical to structure your response around these differences.

[shinny]

Nono, you've missed my point entirely. I've said it's a good idea to structure your points around these characters, but I've just said to indicate your broad overall point in the topic sentence of each paragraph, not to have something like 'The character of Bob epitomises the notion that self interest is likely to proliferate success, but consequently result in damaging an individual's integrity', but perhaps 'Throughout the play, the author reveals the notion that self-interest will inevitably sacrifice an individual's integrity. Through the character of Bob, we are given insight into...etcetc continuing about the single character'. And yes, obviously I have no idea what AMFAS is about or what it is, or if its even a play (I seem to recall it is though). It's just that I've been told VERY specific instructions not to include characters in the topic sentences and intro of a thematic essay by my teacher, tutor and in many English guides, as you're trying to address the theme in terms of  the overall ideas the work presents, and then supplying evidence (characters) to back these up. But like you said, each to their own.

EDIT: Also forgot, the main problem with this is you're severely limiting yourself in terms of what you can speak about. A purely based character approach to a thematic question is often akin to digging yourself a grave since there should be much more other stuff you could use such as literary devices, stage craft for a play, cinematic techniques etc. It's quite hard to slot these in when you state your topic sentence to be about a character as opposed to an overall idea. Since theres only one analytical essay in the exam now, you're expected to show an overall understanding of the text in JUST this one essay, so you'll also need to bring in the context of the book, its overall themes, the writer's contention and well, characters of course.

[costargh]

Lol, I think we essentially share the same point of view after reading your post. I'm just not that good at describing how I write to people as it makes sense in my head but I'm shocking at explaining how it forms in my head.

[shinny]

Ahah well damn, that was pointless =P Oh well, good reference for everyone else.

[Chocoholic]

omg....I can't believe that whole time you guys were talking about the same thing.