ebate over Richard in modern times. The people for Richard say that he can best be described using his motto, “Loyalty Binds Me.” His supporters do, however, realize his faults and say he was a man put into a position he could not handle. The people against Richard, on the other hand, paint a very different image of Richard. They have the Tudor image of him. For them, Richard is an evil man, “who is the personification of a man of evil vengeance” (Roper).CONCLUSIONPeople’s opinion of Thomas More did not change due to his portrayal by many contemporary historians, unlike Richard the III. In fact there is plenty of evidence to show that he was a true saint who deserved his title. Richard’s character is still doubtful, because there was no one who would vouch for him. For Shakespeare, drama was art, a representation of reality, not reality itself, even if the plot was based on history. Though it may never be known who the real Richard was, no Richard has had so much imagination as much as the character created by Shakespeare. It has been admitted that Shakespeare owed his representation of Richard III to St. Thomas More, and that although More tended toward exaggeration, Shakespeare took it a step further. In A Man for All Seasons, Thomas More is shown to be in direct conflict to Shakespeare’s portrayal of Richard the Third. There are no right or wrong answers to what More did. What is right for More isn’t necessarily right for everyone else. The point, ultimately, is to obey your conscience. ...
