True desires and salvation; written sometime before the end of the fifteenth century, the anonymous moral play Everyman speaks to the multitude of intrinsic and extrinsic factors at work in the interplay of the human experience. During this time of strict church practices and dire consequences for noncompliance many internal tensions afflicted the medieval population. The protagonist, Everyman, embodies this internal struggle between intrinsic, instinctual desire and the exterior forces of the church and social convention. The allegorical characters Everyman encounters along his journey for salvation reveal the psychological battle existent when one’s natural desires conflict with expectations. In this instance, the church and societal moral
…show more content…
In his analysis “Everyman: A Dramatization of Death” scholar Allen D. Goldhammer examines this relationship urging, “The psychological significance of Everyman’s interview with Goods is evident…Everyman’s current situation requires an aid for death, not life” (94). In other words, Everyman’s immediate trust in Goods signifies his actions’ habitual drive. Accumulation of literal goods, as marked by his devotion to the allegorical figure, is how Everyman derives pleasure and lives his life up to the point of Death’s summoning. However, Death’s summoning requires him to consider consequence, thus inciting tension within the drives of his psyche. He has to now consider the external forces as they dictate his fate; a capability the id does not comprise. Goldhammer continues his analysis of the implications for Everyman’s habitual actions as they relate to the social and religious construct in power. He asserts, “Not only is the love of goods a sin and hence cannot aid in one’s salvation, but the very possession of them will come to naught” (Goldhammer 94). Everyman needs to focus now on survival and not on pleasurable desires. His difficulty with this and implicit devotion to Goods indicates the influence of his id and resulting imbalances of forces within his psyche; his ego is not balancing the pleasure drive of the id or the fear of consequences embedded in the
In his analysis “Everyman: A Dramatization of Death” scholar Allen D. Goldhammer examines this relationship urging, “The psychological significance of Everyman’s interview with Goods is evident…Everyman’s current situation requires an aid for death, not life” (94). In other words, Everyman’s immediate trust in Goods signifies his actions’ habitual drive. Accumulation of literal goods, as marked by his devotion to the allegorical figure, is how Everyman derives pleasure and lives his life up to the point of Death’s summoning. However, Death’s summoning requires him to consider consequence, thus inciting tension within the drives of his psyche. He has to now consider the external forces as they dictate his fate; a capability the id does not comprise. Goldhammer continues his analysis of the implications for Everyman’s habitual actions as they relate to the social and religious construct in power. He asserts, “Not only is the love of goods a sin and hence cannot aid in one’s salvation, but the very possession of them will come to naught” (Goldhammer 94). Everyman needs to focus now on survival and not on pleasurable desires. His difficulty with this and implicit devotion to Goods indicates the influence of his id and resulting imbalances of forces within his psyche; his ego is not balancing the pleasure drive of the id or the fear of consequences embedded in the