Everyman, Material Goods and Salvation - Research Paper Example

Prof’s Everyman, Material Goods and Salvation Everyman was a morality play composed around the turn of the 16th century, which details the plight of “everyman” (who, obviously, is supposed to represent all of humanity) in attempting to achieve salvation in a world full of temptation. The beginning of the 16th century and the end of the 15th century were a time of incredible upheaval. Society was shifting drastically from moment to moment, and as with any drastic shifts in a society, this was accompanied by all manner of uproars and issues. Medieval society, which was largely agrarian and feudal, was quickly eroding, and many traditional structures were eroding with it. Classes were changing rapidly, with a growing burgher, mercantile middle class concentrating more and more wealth in their own hands, while nobles power was slowly decreasing and the life of the peasant was slowly becoming more monetary, relying on taking goods to market and so forth (Rainguard 68), rather than existing primarily through subsistence agriculture. Similarly, the church was in the early stages of upheaval over money itself: Martin Luther composed his famous theses almost simultaneously with the construction of this text, and the protestant reformation started in Germany around the same era, all over the monetization of Church goods through the selling of indulgences and other actions to bring money into the church (Crownston 19). In many ways this time was mirrored by the times in which the bible was composed: then too there was a great deal of social upheaval, with the Romans having recently gained control of the Levant and with the second temple being relatively newly constructed. It is thus unsurprising that there are significant parallels between the structures Everyman shares significant parallels with the bible. Each text represents a contemporary response to a growing moral crisis in each era, but both shared a common thread that money, its temptation and so forth, played a central role in the moral crisis of both the first and the sixteenth centuries. In order to understand Everyman the first step must be to understand its historical context. Though a Middle English play, Everyman is not necessarily medieval. The English Renaissance was beginning around the time of its composition, and this brought with it significant changes in society. Probably the most significant change was the role of towns. Towns had always existed in England, and one could argue were essentially perpetually growing until the time of the black death (Esser 67), where they suffered significant decreases in population, obviously. The boom that followed the black death, however, led to one of the greatest mass migrations of people into towns ever. Peasants who rented from their lord (IE were not serfs and thus owned by the lord) could often find better livings in towns, as well as greater protection of the law (not being at the whim of a local lord), and increased economic freedom (Esser 69). They had greater chances to acquire wealth on a large scale, and thus become prosperous. This meant that a growing amount of the population lived in a monetary society, where money was the basis of living instead of goods. This was a drastic shift from a few centuries earlier, when even rent was paid using goods such as livestock or grains. Another of the greatest changes was the role of goods. Though industrialization was certainly not yet occurring, early stages of changes in manufacturing were. Instead of one person making a finished product (a shoe, for instance), during this time period, there began to be greater specialization – one person might make the sole, while the other made the laces and so forth. Each of these specialized crafts was then set up into a guild (Richardson 150), which controlled the membership of that producing class. This combined with a spike in international trade to (Richardson 161) to lead to the growing and increasingly wealthy mercantile class. This class was not bound by the moral codes or practices of the nobility, though their wealth was often equal or in excess of that of nobles (Richardson 180). Finally, the church had a growing practice of monetizing its services, especially the sale of indulgences. This meant that the church was seen to exploit the common people, giving them questionable forgiveness for sins in exchange for money. It is thus easy to see that in nearly every part of the society in which Everyman was composed, money was a significant moral concern. Its role was ever increasing, and people did not know how to feel about that: it was just incredibly different from how things were before, and the idea of hard work or noble birth being associated with prosperity was disappearing, replaced by the ability of merchants to parlay money into more money in what the public viewed as morally questionable ways. Money was thus a central concern to Everyman, and can be seen as what is probably the primary barrier to salvation. The play opens with a lament on the part of god who believes that material goods have made people turn away from him: “I perceyue here in my maiste / How that all creatures be to me unkyne / Lyuynge without drede in worldely prospertyte / of ghostly sight the people be so blynde” (Everyman). This is an incredibly interesting way to open the play, for several reasons. Firstly, God blames all of the moral upheaval in the world primarily on worldly prosperity: he thinks that the acquisition of wealth is in direct opposition to people living in a non god fearing way (or “without drede”), and without an eye to the spiritual (“ghostly sight… blind”). But one word in particular is of note - the word “unkind.” This word would have had a dual meaning to a medieval audience. The first would be a meaning similar to what we would understand it as: god laments that people are not treating him with the respect that he deserves for giving them life, his son in death, and so forth. However, this word also has another meaning: kind means natural. Thus humans are in an unnatural state, because of the world of money that they have build around themselves. Everyman thus tries to argue that humans natural state more resembles the one that had existed for a long period in the Middle Ages: where people primarily worked the ground to feed themselves, trading in kind, without a great deal of luxury. The state of burghers living in a city in the trapping of wealth is an unnatural distortion of the human condition, and is thus implied to give both physical and spiritual decay. These concerns with money are similar to, but do not mirror exactly, concerns expressed in the bible. Money is typically talked about in the bible in terms of morality, discussing what appropriate uses of money are for, and encouraging believers to be generous with their money in terms of giving to others and being charitable. There are, however, some indications that money can be a corrupting force: one of the most famous instances occurs in Matthew, 19:23-24, in which Jesus is said to have said “I tell you the truth, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of God” (Matthew 19: 23-4). A similar passage occurs in Mark 10: 24-5 and Luke 18: 24-5. This seems to argue that being rich is in somehow morally decadent: it could either be that being rich is morally reprehensible because there are poor people who could use that money more, or because morally repugnant things needed to be done to amass such wealth. Furthermore, the bible shows serious discontent with money in holy spheres during the famous cleansing of the temple, in which Jesus essentially argues that money has dirtied what should be a spiritual place, part of his campaign against the hegemonic structures of temple Judaism that existed in during Jesus’s time period. Both Everyman and the bible show remarkable parallels on one major front: a concern with money. During the time periods in which each was composed, the role of money was a growing question: to Jesus it was the mark of a ruling Roman people and a corrupt temple, while to the creator of Everyman it was a growing problem in society which needed to be dealt with. While each has its own particular interpretation about the role of money in society, they agree on some fundamental points: that money seems to have a morally reprehensible character, and that it is hard for those who have amassed a great deal of it to achieve reward in the kingdom of heaven. While Everyman is more clear and distinct in its criticism of a monetary society, the bible shares its concerns. Both Everyman and the Bible show considerable stress over monetary issues, believing money to be a central cause of man’s moral decline. Works Cited Crownston, Claire. "Women, Gender, and Guilds in Early Modern Europe: An Overview of Recent Research." International Review of Social History 53.S16 (2008): 19. Esser, Raingard. "'they Obey all Magistrates and all Good Lawes ... and we Thinke our Cittie Happie to Enjoye them': Migrants and Urban Stability in Early Modern English Towns."Urban History 34.1 (2007): 64-75. Everyman. In Norton Anthology of English Literature. New York: Norton (2008). Richardson, Gary. "Craft Guilds and Christianity in Late-Medieval England: A Rational-Choice Analysis." Rationality and Society 17.2 .2005: 139-89. Read More