FAQ - Transformations - Hamlet / Rosencrantz & Guildenstern (1 Viewer)

grk_styl · Jul 23, 2006

MODULE A: COMPARATIVE STUDY OF TEXTS AND CONTEXTS
Elective 1: Transformations
Hamlet / Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead

NB: Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead will further be referred to as “RaGaD”

This FAQ is designed to help HSC students studying the texts Hamlet by William Shakespeare and RaGaD] by Tom Stoppard for the Comparative Study of Texts and Contexts Module for English. I take no responsibility for the accuracy or validity of the statements below. All new questions about Hamlet or RaGaD not already dealt with here should be posted below and will be added to the FAQ in due course. Any more threads asking questions about Hamlet or RaGaD will be closed.

From the Syllabus

Board of Studies Syllabus said:
This module requires students to compare texts in order to explore them in relation to their contexts. It develops students’ understanding of the effects of context and questions of value.

Each elective in this module requires the study of groups of texts which are to be selected from a prescribed text list. These texts may be in different forms or media.

Students examine ways in which social, cultural and historical context influences aspects of texts, or the ways in which changes in context lead to changed values being reflected in texts. This includes study and use of the language of texts, consideration of purposes and audiences, and analysis of the content, values and attitudes conveyed through a range of readings.

Students develop a range of imaginative, interpretive and analytical compositions that relate to the comparative study of texts and context. These compositions may be realised in a variety of forms and media.

The Specific Module

English Stage 6 Syllabus said:
This module requires students to compare texts in order to explore them in relation to their contexts. It develops students’ understanding of the effects of contexts and questions of value

In this unit, you compare:
characters: how the audience see each character in each play and how they differ
language styles used
societal background in each play and how they influence Shakespeare/Stoppard in writing the play
compare the different plots and how they interlink
themes, there are some themes that are used in BOTH plays, but are viewed in a different perspective – too lazy

Texts are composed in particular contexts. Over time, as the context changes, so do values and attitudes. This can be spurned by religious, social, political and other historical events, like the Reformation, World War 1 and 2 and Women's Rights Movements to name a few.

The transformations are a study of relating texts to contexts and how a new context influences a text and how it is changed to suit that context. In R and G Are Dead, values of the monarchy, the chain of being, the divine right of kingship, religion, death, revenge and family values have changed. You examine both texts and see some parallel scenes and compare them, and you see what values and attitudes are inherent in both.

Keep in mind audience (basically a general audience of Shakespeare to a more intelligent audience for Stoppard), purpose (ostensibly, to entertain, but make a social comment etc.), language use (examine a few soliloquies like "to be or not to be" for death and some misuse of language in R and G Are Dead like the exchange of incorrectly used cliches and ironic language) as well as values and attitudes as conveyed through the text. – MaryTylerMoore

What is Hamlet about?
Hamlet itself is NOT an original story - it's an adaption of some much earlier european play we only have fragments of today. It is really quite big on existentialism - how much control we have. Hamlet essentially represents the "modern man" (how daring for an Elizabethan play) and he speaks in prose whilst everyone else speaks in traditional pentameter. – glitterfairy

Sparknotes said:
On a dark winter night, a ghost walks the ramparts of Elsinore Castle in Denmark. Discovered first by a pair of watchmen, then by the scholar Horatio, the ghost resembles the recently deceased King Hamlet, whose brother Claudius has inherited the throne and married the king’s widow, Queen Gertrude. When Horatio and the watchmen bring Prince Hamlet, the son of Gertrude and the dead king, to see the ghost, it speaks to him, declaring ominously that it is indeed his father’s spirit, and that he was murdered by none other than Claudius. Ordering Hamlet to seek revenge on the man who usurped his throne and married his wife, the ghost disappears with the dawn.

Prince Hamlet devotes himself to avenging his father’s death, but, because he is contemplative and thoughtful by nature, he delays, entering into a deep melancholy and even apparent madness. Claudius and Gertrude worry about the prince’s erratic behavior and attempt to discover its cause. They employ a pair of Hamlet’s friends, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, to watch him. When Polonius, the pompous Lord Chamberlain, suggests that Hamlet may be mad with love for his daughter, Ophelia, Claudius agrees to spy on Hamlet in conversation with the girl. But though Hamlet certainly seems mad, he does not seem to love Ophelia: he orders her to enter a nunnery and declares that he wishes to ban marriages.

A group of traveling actors comes to Elsinore, and Hamlet seizes upon an idea to test his uncle’s guilt. He will have the players perform a scene closely resembling the sequence by which Hamlet imagines his uncle to have murdered his father, so that if Claudius is guilty, he will surely react. When the moment of the murder arrives in the theater, Claudius leaps up and leaves the room. Hamlet and Horatio agree that this proves his guilt. Hamlet goes to kill Claudius but finds him praying. Since he believes that killing Claudius while in prayer would send Claudius’s soul to heaven, Hamlet considers that it would be an inadequate revenge and decides to wait. Claudius, now frightened of Hamlet’s madness and fearing for his own safety, orders that Hamlet be sent to England at once.

Hamlet goes to confront his mother, in whose bedchamber Polonius has hidden behind a tapestry. Hearing a noise from behind the tapestry, Hamlet believes the king is hiding there. He draws his sword and stabs through the fabric, killing Polonius. For this crime, he is immediately dispatched to England with Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. However, Claudius’s plan for Hamlet includes more than banishment, as he has given Rosencrantz and Guildenstern sealed orders for the King of England demanding that Hamlet be put to death.

In the aftermath of her father’s death, Ophelia goes mad with grief and drowns in the river. Polonius’s son, Laertes, who has been staying in France, returns to Denmark in a rage. Claudius convinces him that Hamlet is to blame for his father’s and sister’s deaths. When Horatio and the king receive letters from Hamlet indicating that the prince has returned to Denmark after pirates attacked his ship en route to England, Claudius concocts a plan to use Laertes’ desire for revenge to secure Hamlet’s death. Laertes will fence with Hamlet in innocent sport, but Claudius will poison Laertes’ blade so that if he draws blood, Hamlet will die. As a backup plan, the king decides to poison a goblet, which he will give Hamlet to drink should Hamlet score the first or second hits of the match. Hamlet returns to the vicinity of Elsinore just as Ophelia’s funeral is taking place. Stricken with grief, he attacks Laertes and declares that he had in fact always loved Ophelia. Back at the castle, he tells Horatio that he believes one must be prepared to die, since death can come at any moment. A foolish courtier named Osric arrives on Claudius’s orders to arrange the fencing match between Hamlet and Laertes.

The sword-fighting begins. Hamlet scores the first hit, but declines to drink from the king’s proffered goblet. Instead, Gertrude takes a drink from it and is swiftly killed by the poison. Laertes succeeds in wounding Hamlet, though Hamlet does not die of the poison immediately. First, Laertes is cut by his own sword’s blade, and, after revealing to Hamlet that Claudius is responsible for the queen’s death, he dies from the blade’s poison. Hamlet then stabs Claudius through with the poisoned sword and forces him to drink down the rest of the poisoned wine. Claudius dies, and Hamlet dies immediately after achieving his revenge.

At this moment, a Norwegian prince named Fortinbras, who has led an army to Denmark and attacked Poland earlier in the play, enters with ambassadors from England, who report that Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are dead. Fortinbras is stunned by the gruesome sight of the entire royal family lying sprawled on the floor dead. He moves to take power of the kingdom. Horatio, fulfilling Hamlet’s last request, tells him Hamlet’s tragic story. Fortinbras orders that Hamlet be carried away in a manner befitting a fallen soldier.

What is Rosencrantz about?
+Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead is a satire of Hamlet. Most of Stoppard's comedy comes from the contrast with Shakespearean solemnity (seriousness).
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead is an inversion of Hamlet
It is an irreverent look at what happened behind the scenes in Shakespeare's play.
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are minor characters in Hamet, and Hamlet is a minor character in Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead” – kimii

RAGAD is a "play-within-a-play". It is a tragi-comedy that basically looks at the same story of Hamlet through absurdist eyes. Shakespeare's phrase of " the world is a stage and all the men and women are merely players" comes to life. In the text Ros and Guil are constantly saying "there must have been a moment where we could have said no" and "I seem to remember...." and things like that. The entire thing runs in a loop! RAGAD focuses a lot more on the marginalised characters, giving them life and three-dimensions (in contrast the nobility appear spoilt, distant, two-dimensional etc). In keeping with the "this is a play" theme, many unrealistic scenarios occur such as the flipping of the coin (50 heads in a row!) – glitterfairy

http://www.sff.net/people/mberry/rosen.htp said:
Stoppard's first and perhaps most famous full-length play, Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead presents a worm's-eyeview of a classical tragedy, Shakespeare's Hamlet, as filtered through the existential sensibilities of Samuel Beckett's Waiting for Godot.
The play opens with the title characters alone on stage, placing bets on the toss of a coin while traveling toward Elsinore, the castle of Danish King Claudius and their childhood friend, Prince Hamlet. Guildenstern is perturbed that the coin has come down heads eighty-five times in a row. This seems ominously significant to him. Rosencrantz sees nothing particularly amiss.
R&G inhabit a world completely beyond their comprehension. Unsure of where they are going (and even of who they are and where they come from), they depend upon others to give their lives meaning. While awaiting instructions, they fall back upon games -- word play and simple wagers -- that rarely achieve their intended goals.
Instructed by the King and Queen to "glean what afflicts" poor Hamlet, the boys attempt to cross-examine the prince but end up only more confused. Neither do they have the wit to see their own deaths foretold when the Player and his Tragedians rehearse the melodramatic tragedy, The Murder of Gonzago , which includes the execution of "two smiling accomplices -- friends -- courtiers -- two spies" who accompany a prince to England, only to be betrayed by a purloined letter.
After Hamlet kills Polonius, R&G are dispatched to retrieve the body, but they of course bungle the job. They are then dispatched to England with the prince. During the ocean voyage, R&G discover that the letter they carry from Claudius calls for the immediate cutting off of Hamlet's head. Before they can decided what to do with the letter, it is stolen from them by Hamlet and replaced with another. After the ship is attacked by pirates and Hamlet escapes overboard in a barrel, R&G open the letter again, only to learn that it is now they who must be killed when they arrive in England.
The Player and his band are also on the ship, but he is not especially surprised to learn of this treacherous turn of events, saying, "In our experience, most things end in death." Infuriated, Guildenstern plunges a knife into the Player's throat and watches him die spectacularly. After a moment, the Player jumps up, brushes himself off and reveals the knife to be a spring-loaded fake. Guildenstern is too distraught to be impressed, saying, "Dying is not romantic, and death is not a game which will soon be over...Death is not anything...death is not...It's the absence of presence, nothing more...the endless time of never coming back...a gap you can't see, and when the wind blows throught it, it makes no sound..."
In the end, R&G resign themselves to their fate, although Guildenstern says, "There must have been a moment, at the beginning, when we could have said -- no. But somehow we missed it." Perhaps. But the play ends with two ambassadors from England informing Horatio that, at long last, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are dead.

sparknotes.com said:
The Impossibility of Certainty
What separates Hamlet from other revenge plays (and maybe from every play written before it) is that the action we expect to see, particularly from Hamlet himself, is continually postponed while Hamlet tries to obtain more certain knowledge about what he is doing. This play poses many questions that other plays would simply take for granted. Can we have certain knowledge about ghosts? Is the ghost what it appears to be, or is it really a misleading fiend? Does the ghost have reliable knowledge about its own death, or is the ghost itself deluded? Moving to more earthly matters: How can we know for certain the facts about a crime that has no witnesses? Can Hamlet know the state of Claudius’s soul by watching his behavior? If so, can he know the facts of what Claudius did by observing the state of his soul? Can Claudius (or the audience) know the state of Hamlet’s mind by observing his behavior and listening to his speech? Can we know whether our actions will have the consequences we want them to have? Can we know anything about the afterlife?

Many people have seen Hamlet as a play about indecisiveness, and thus about Hamlet’s failure to act appropriately. It might be more interesting to consider that the play shows us how many uncertainties our lives are built upon, how many unknown quantities are taken for granted when people act or when they evaluate one another’s actions.

The Complexity of Action
Directly related to the theme of certainty is the theme of action. How is it possible to take reasonable, effective, purposeful action? In Hamlet, the question of how to act is affected not only by rational considerations, such as the need for certainty, but also by emotional, ethical, and psychological factors. Hamlet himself appears to distrust the idea that it’s even possible to act in a controlled, purposeful way. When he does act, he prefers to do it blindly, recklessly, and violently. The other characters obviously think much less about “action” in the abstract than Hamlet does, and are therefore less troubled about the possibility of acting effectively. They simply act as they feel is appropriate. But in some sense they prove that Hamlet is right, because all of their actions miscarry. Claudius possesses himself of queen and crown through bold action, but his conscience torments him, and he is beset by threats to his authority (and, of course, he dies). Laertes resolves that nothing will distract him from acting out his revenge, but he is easily influenced and manipulated into serving Claudius’s ends, and his poisoned rapier is turned back upon himself.

The Mystery of Death
In the aftermath of his father’s murder, Hamlet is obsessed with the idea of death, and over the course of the play he considers death from a great many perspectives. He ponders both the spiritual aftermath of death, embodied in the ghost, and the physical remainders of the dead, such as by Yorick’s skull and the decaying corpses in the cemetery. Throughout, the idea of death is closely tied to the themes of spirituality, truth, and uncertainty in that death may bring the answers to Hamlet’s deepest questions, ending once and for all the problem of trying to determine truth in an ambiguous world. And, since death is both the cause and the consequence of revenge, it is intimately tied to the theme of revenge and justice—Claudius’s murder of King Hamlet initiates Hamlet’s quest for revenge, and Claudius’s death is the end of that quest.

The question of his own death plagues Hamlet as well, as he repeatedly contemplates whether or not suicide is a morally legitimate action in an unbearably painful world. Hamlet’s grief and misery is such that he frequently longs for death to end his suffering, but he fears that if he commits suicide, he will be consigned to eternal suffering in hell because of the Christian religion’s prohibition of suicide. In his famous “To be or not to be” soliloquy (III.i), Hamlet philosophically concludes that no one would choose to endure the pain of life if he or she were not afraid of what will come after death, and that it is this fear which causes complex moral considerations to interfere with the capacity for action.

The Nation as a Diseased Body
Everything is connected in Hamlet, including the welfare of the royal family and the health of the state as a whole. The play’s early scenes explore the sense of anxiety and dread that surrounds the transfer of power from one ruler to the next. Throughout the play, characters draw explicit connections between the moral legitimacy of a ruler and the health of the nation. Denmark is frequently described as a physical body made ill by the moral corruption of Claudius and Gertrude, and many observers interpret the presence of the ghost as a supernatural omen indicating that “omething is rotten in the state of Denmark” (I.iv.67). The dead King Hamlet is portrayed as a strong, forthright ruler under whose guard the state was in good health, while Claudius, a wicked politician, has corrupted and compromised Denmark to satisfy his own appetites. At the end of the play, the rise to power of the upright Fortinbras suggests that Denmark will be strengthened once again.

Themes in Rosencrantz
I think the most important theme in R&G is fate/destiny. Time and time again, ros and guil play coin games that are realistically impossible. Heck, they don't even know their own names. Other characters don't know their names. They don't know where they are. They don't know where they're going.

And yet their destiny is pre-ordained. Right from the start - or the cover - it says that they're dead/are going to die. This oh-so-slightly suggests that they have NO control over their fate.” – glitterfairy

The player is really important when you consider the values of destiny and self-determinism in R&G. Ros and Guild have absolutely no idea what they are doing and they hate it... their world is a turmoil of confusing, random and seemingly unconnected incidences that represent the meaninglessness of life in the 60s. Because they're trying to find meaning out of this nothing, looking for a core purpose or direction, they end up looking like fools. In contrast, the Player understands that he is in a play... not jus the lil skits he does as part of his job, but he also knows he is in the play called ros&guild are dead. This is a trick called metatheatre; a play-within-a-play. And the player's acceptance of this makes him a much more assertive, less confused character.
Guild: Who decides? (ros mighta said this.. i cant remember now)
Player: Decides? It is written.
His awareness of his inability to control things makes him a much more sensible character. Which probably says something about Stoppard's world, a society searching for meaning in nothing. - +::$i[Q]u3::+

Themes in comparison

1. Fate and Destiny
Hamlet - Think about Hamlet's fate as 'the avenger'. He initially refuses this destiny and chooses not to follow that path. However, the belief of the time was that fate could not be avoided, so ultimately whether Hamlet liked it or not, he was destined to walk a preordained path. Also consider the fate of other characters in the play. Claudius kills Hamlet Snr. so is destined to die. Hamlet Jr. kills Laertes, Claudius and Polonius so is destined to die. Gertrude 'betrays' her marriage bed, so is effectively destined to die. Destiny and fate are portrayed throughout Hamlet as being inescapable and as a predetermination of justice.

RAGAD- In RAGAD fate and destiny play a very major role. Think about the coin tossing, the inescapability of their stage directions etc. The two lead characters are ultimately destined to die, even before we finish reading the title. We know, from our knowledge of Hamlet, that the two will die. No character from the play, nor the audience, not even Stoppard can prevent that. Destiny in RAGAD takes control away from the characters and away from the composer. The only power anyone has is through that of language. The meaninglessness of their conversations and the constant 'Should we go? I don't know, should we? Or we could just stay...' type dialogue are indicative of their ability to construct and use language, but that even that language cannot transform their fate. Fate, again in this text, effectively leaves everyone powerless. You cannot prevent, nor overcome it.

2. Action vs. Inaction
Hamlet - Action and inaction are prevalent concepts in this text; the entirety of the text is based on the indicisiveness of a man. The primary conflict of the play is Hamlet's inner argument of whether to act or not. The difference between the two, and what has been transformed, is that Hamlet is ultimately been given the choice to act.

RAGAD - Here, neither Ros nor Guil are given the choice. Though the characters are portrayed as being indecisive and unwilling to take action, it is infact not their choice to be so. Their composer, Shakespeare, has 'given' them a fate and Stoppard is forced to conform to these restrictions. They are therefore stripped of their ability to act.

3. Identity

Hamlet - Primarily, consider Hamlet's inner debate over whether or not to accept the position of 'the avenger'. This is really the only situation where a question of identity rises however. Everyone knows their position, knows their job, knows their purpose. This is very reflective of the Elizabethan period.

RAGAD - Stoppard however, gives his two characters a MAJOR identity crisis. Neither, really, know who they are, their names, their roles, their purpose or their direction. They don't know why they are where they are, what they are supposed to do there and why they feel compelled to stay. These uncertainties are entirely reflective of the existential beliefs of the time. Why are we here? What is our purpose? Why do we stay if death is the only certainty? The Player is the only real character in Stoppard's play who is sure of himself. Ironic, in that the Player is believed to be a reflection of Stoppard's true artistic beliefs, yet Stoppard is the one asking the fundamental questions.

4. Death

Hamlet - Fairly self explainatory in both texts. But in short, death in Hamlet is portrayed as romantic and tragic, but only tragic to those of nobility. Deaths are 'over the top': stabbings and poisonings etc. but death only comes to those who deserve it. It is seen as a deliverance of justice. (Remember Elizabethans had strong beliefs in the religious and monarchal system of justice, it came to those who broke the 'Chain of Being'.)

RAGAD - Death in RAGAD however, is transformed into simply an 'absence of presence'. It is no longer reserved for the nobleman, but becomes tragic for the common man also. However, it is tragic not because of its romanticism, but because it comes to those who do not deserve it. As Ros states, 'We didn't harm anyone, did we?'. The two are not (really) guilty of anything, but are still killed. – Sam.

The notion of fate is a great one- Hamlet is always discussing 'to be or not to be', questioning his role in fate and whether he can change anything. In R&G, Ros and Guil are presented as something akin to slaves of fate- they have no control over their destiny whatsoever- it is predetermined. "There must have been a point where we could have said no...we must have missed it" is evidence of this.

Death is a big Elizabethan theme- the ghost approaches Hamlet because he cannot move on until his earthy business has been concluded. Dealth, and also bloody goriness typical to Elizabethan Revenge Tragedy, is a big part- Hamlet will seek revenge via the sword. However in R&G death is represented in a comical, flippant fashion. However yet again fate has predetermined Ros and Guil's fate in the title: "R & G are Dead".

Identity is also a huge part to play in both roles. In Hamlet, the rich, eloquent language constantly seeks, in a self-reflexive way, Hamlet's own identity and place in a world that is in the process of changing from a traditional world (divine right of kingship etc) to new ideas, and new ways of thinking- Hamlet is a novus hommo, a new man, who begins to think in a Humanist way (echoing the historical context of the transition between Catholicism to Protestantism of the times- the religious and thus also social upheaval). Ros and Guil actually have no idea who they are, or even why they are in particular places or for what reason- "we were summoned, and now we are here" is all they can think of. Even their stichomatic word games- "I'll Hie you home!" "Who are you?" "you're yourself" show that language- the only tool which they can use to communicate- is meaningless.

Stoppard's focus on marginalised characters such as Ros and Guil, also his focus on the meaningless quality of language (so different for Shakespeare's prose, here is colloquial, even crude lines) is typical of the Absurdist Theatre which focuses on absurd things, such as language, and any past beliefs, typical of the 60s movement in which the movement from Modernism to Post-Modernism (I'm not sure of that actually, but it seems about right( beliefs led so many to question what was previously taken without question. – Glitterfairy

Existentialism/absurdism
Dictionary definition of existentialism:

A philosophical theory or approach that emphasises the existence of the individual person as a free and responsible agent determining their own development through acts of the will. Generally taken to originate with Kierkegaard and Nietzsche, existentialism tends to be atheistic (although there is a strand of Christian existentialism deriving from the work of Kierkegaard), to disparage scientific knowledge, and to deny the existence of objective values, stressing instead the reality and significance of human freedom and experience. The approach was developed chiefly in 20th-century Europe, notably by Martin Heidegger, Jean-Paul Sartre, Albert Camus, and Simone de Beauvoir.

Click to expand...

In other words, it is the exploration of free will vs. fate and destiny + the explorations of direction and purpose in life.

Neither is directly related to religion, in particular Atheism. Absurdism is a form of theatre. It can be used to portray any issue, theme, story or set of characters that a composer wishes to. Absurdism does not directly relate to any other 'ism', rather it is simply a style of performance, writing and drama. Existentialism, as said before, is an idea or philosophical musing of modern times, which concerns the purpose and meaning of humanity, fate and destiny, our direction and our determination. Atheism can effectively be classed as a religion, or specifically, a lack of it. Atheists are simple those who choose not to follow a particular religious path and do not believe in any God. However most Atheists still commonly believe that spirituality (just not the religious type) form a large part in their lives. – Sam.

wikipedia.com said:

Existentialism is a philosophical movement that is generally considered a study that pursues meaning in existence and seeks value for the existing individual. Existentialism, unlike other fields of philosophy, does not treat the individual as a concept, and values individual subjectivity over objectivity. As a result, questions regarding the meaning of life and subjective experience are seen as being of paramount importance, above all other scientific and philosophical pursuits. Existentialism often is associated with anxiety, dread, awareness of death, and freedom. Famous existentialists include Sartre, Nietzsche, Kierkegaard, Camus, and Heidegger.
Existentialism emphasizes action, freedom, and decision as fundamental to human existence and is fundamentally opposed to the rationalist tradition and to positivism. That is, it argues against definitions of human beings either as primarily rational, knowing beings who relate to reality primarily as an object of knowledge, or for whom action can or ought to be regulated by rational principles, or as beings who can be defined in terms of their behavior as it looks to or is studied by others. More generally it rejects all of the Western rationalist definitions of being in terms of a rational principle or essence or as the most general feature that all existing things share in common. Existentialism tends to view human beings as subjects in an indifferent, objective, often ambiguous, and "absurd" universe in which meaning is not provided by the natural order, but rather can be created, however provisionally and unstably, by human beings' actions and interpretations.
Although there are certain common tendencies among existentialist thinkers, there are major differences and disagreements among them, and not all of them even affiliate themselves with or accept the validity of the term "existentialism". In German, the phrase Existenzphilosophie (philosophy of existence) is also used.

Click to expand...

tiscali.co.uk said:

Avant-garde drama originating with a group of dramatists in the 1950s, including Samuel Beckett, Eugène Ionesco, Jean Genet, and Harold Pinter. Their work expressed the belief that, in a godless universe, human existence has no meaning or purpose and all communication breaks down. Logical construction and argument gives way to irrational and illogical speech and to its ultimate conclusion, silence, as in Beckett's play Breath (1970).
To some extent, this work has its roots in the drama of early German expressionism, which is concerned with the influence upon individuals of an increasingly mechanized and uncaring society. Writers of absurdist theatre divide from those in epic theatre in that absurdists see no hope, whereas the German epic dramatist Brecht argues that the role of drama is to change people's attitudes and, through this, society. Although absurdist theatre appears completely opposed to the realistic ideas of naturalism, the work is often founded on very precise observation of human nature and behaviour.

Click to expand...

Similarities
Personally, the only real links I see between R&G and Hamlet is the general plot structure (nothing new happens, we just look at things from a different perspective). R&G is defined by Hamlet, but that's about it. What it actually does and explores is totally new territory. – glitterfairy

Both texts ask Existentialists questions such as is there life after death? Is our destiny pre-ordained? Can we change destiny? – glitterfairy

How long should I spend on each text?
Ultimately you should spend approximately 50% on each text. That way you show the marker that you have a complete understanding of BOTH texts and you haven’t just read one and read the study guide of the other! A good essay balances both texts equally and shows a thorough understanding of each text.

How do I write an essay with both texts?
The easiest way to plan any essay for this module is to write down the values, and ideas in both texts in two columns. pick the onew which interest you, then explain what they mean in each text, then refer to examples. it is then neccessary to compare your second text value/idea to your first and explain how the idea has been 'transformed' i.e. how is it different. use examples of where this is seen.

e.g. death is seen as an escape for hamlet during the play, but the idea of death is influenced hight by Christian values during the play e.g. the whole 'To be or not to be" speech.

death in R&G is seen as the absence of being "death isn't. Death is not. Death is the ultimate negative", and this idea show the absence of religious values present in Shakespeares era. Illidan

How do they relate to the module?
Well, if we think about this completely simplistically (without going into techniques, et al) after reading both texts, you do see elements of one in the other. For instance; if you re-read Hamlet, you'd probably pay more attention to the position of Ros&Guil, and you'd notice the fact that they ARE in fact marginalised, and treated as insignificant plot devices. Language-wise, well, I'm sure that you'd find Shakespeare a much less "readable" and realistic text in your 21st century context than you would Ros&Guil - and perhaps the silliness of some of the things that Hamlet says might be more obvious to you.

On the other hand, if you reread R&G in terms of Hamlet, you realise just how much the R&G plays on the 'great name' of the text. You might also notice how contextual differences have meant that R&G explores the same concepts but comes up with completely different answers. You may realise how ambiguous the language Stoppard uses is in comparison to Shakespeare's language. Etc etc etc.

To put it another way; it's rather like having a reading of a text. A reading is shaped, naturally, by the reader's context. But by reading it in our contemporary context, we give the text a different meaning to that which the composer may have intended. For instance, (discounting RAGAD), many of us now can't read Hamlet without wondering wth is with his obsession with his mother, and does he actually have an Oedipus Complex? Almost every production that you see of Hamlet now plays it with that theory in mind.

So RAGAD works similarly. We cannot read one without thinking of the other. j-mo

"New readings" of the old text refers to the way in which Stoppard has taken elements of HAMLET and revamped them for a contemporary audience. For example, the concept of fate and destiny is explored in both texts. HAMLET portrays the idea that Hamlet's destiny has already been determined because of his birth and his society.
QUOTES:
“His will is not his own.”
“How all occasions do inform against me.”
"he is subject to his birth."

RAGAD examines the idea of fate and destiny from a philosophical persepective, using the principles of existentialism as a basis. The philosophy suggests that there is no control, no direction, and that people have no influence on their surroundings.
QUOTES:
"We have no control. None at all."
“There must have been a moment, at the beginning, where we could have said – no. But somehow we missed it.”

Another example of context altering the manner in which a theme is presented is life and death. HAMLET examines this concept from a religious perspective, while RaGaD removes the religious aspect.
Christianity was prominent during the Elizabethan era, and this is why religion plays such a large part in the text. The 60s, on the other hand, was a time of social experimentation, and freedom of choice. Philosophy was popular, and religion was dying.

The idea that Shakespeare's text could be revamped to be relevant to a contemporary audience is what the question is referring to, so you need to explain how Stoppard has taken Sakespeare's themes and characters and given them new meaning, as well as explaining how he has taken the same elements of the text and altered them to present the same meaning in a way that creates relevance for a contemporary audience. – Aimee05

Essay Scaffold
This is by no means THE PERFECT SCAFFOLD, but just a guide. My suggestion is to write a scaffold before every essay and show it to your teacher.

Introduction
Make a statement about the transformation of texts. Introduce the two texts (in this case, “Hamlet” by Shakespeare and “Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead” by Tom Stoppard. Provide some points as to how these two texts are similar or dissimilar. Basically, tell the marker what you will be arguing. Lastly, answer the question!!

Paragraph
An introduction to Hamlet’s world. You can include quotes from the novel describing Hamlet. Also you can include quotes about the period and society and how, ultimately, this society will either be similar or dissimilar to the one portrayed in RaGaD.

Paragraph
An introduction to Ros and Guild’s world. Same as above, but all for Ros and Guild. You could possibly state that although these two texts differ in some situations and are similar in others, BOTH texts illustrate the same message. What is this message?

Paragraph
For the next few paragraphs, you have two options:
Thematically – choose a theme and show how it is similar (or dissimilar) in both texts, providing quotes to support your argument or
Text by text – discuss a theme from one text then create a linking sentence when you begin to write the next paragraph.
This choice is entirely up to you and which is more comfortable and ultimately easier for you to write.

Conclusion
This is the easiest (or so they say): Sum up your argument!

NOTE: MAKE SURE YOU CONSTANTLY REFER TO THE QUESTION THROUGHOUT YOUR WHOLE ESSAY. MAKE CONNECTIONS, USE THE WORDS FROM THE QUESTION, JUST ANSWER IT!

Essay Offering
“Rosencrantz and Guildenstern is an existentialist play, concentrating on the ideas of "why are we here", "what are we doing" and fate. They find themselves as 'pawns' in a strategical and deceptive game being played out between Hamlet and Claudius, yet don't make any attempt to escape. The two characters seem to be almost stuck in limbo, completely uncertain of and confused about what they are expected to do. Hamlet mirrors these feelings, though in a different psychological state of mind. Rosencrantz, Guildenstern and Hamlet are all dealing with their impending death, subconsciously predicting their fates, but most often making no attempt to rid themselves of the situation.

Stoppard's play is effectively based in realism (references to physics etc.), but is shown in a world, seemingly, devoid of logic (shown through the confusion and 'swapping' of the two leads). He questions the importance of God and fate, and portrays humanity as having little purpose in life. Comparatively, Hamlet takes supernatural and illogical themes and presents them in a (contextually) realistic scene. The play's hierarchy (God being the highest power, followed by the King etc.) is disrupted, and the plot shows its effects. Everyone in Shakespeare's world has a defined purpose; Stoppard's characters seem to have little, if any purpose in their actions and their lives.

R&G also rejects Hamlet's use of dialogue. In Shakespeare's play, dialogue is used to expose psychology, emotion and feeling. In Stoppard's, dialogue and verbal communication between people is shown to be ineffective at conveying people's real emotions and psyche (eg. R&G's seemingly meaningless ramblings when they are bored).

Both plays also deal with the issue of death in different manners. In R&G death is fated, it is simply a part of life. Death will happen no matter what, and Stoppard asks whether life is really worth living if death is certain. The play implies that no matter what these two, seemingly innocent, characters do, they will always be trapped within their own destiny, determined by Hamlet's plot. It gives a negative view of death, that we cannot escape it no matter our choices, actions and principles. These ideas of existentialism, fate, free will vs. determinism and the search for value were all prevalant concepts in the context in which Stoppard wrote. The 60s were a time of questioning (of both society and God) and all are portrayed within R&G. Hamlet on the other hand, depicts death in an oddly positive light - that it only comes to those who go against God's will. Claudius kills Hamlet Snr and disrupts the heirarchal order, so is killed. Hamlet Jnr kills Polonius, Laertes, Claudius and Ophelia to an extent, so is therefore killed. The conclusion gives the audience a sense of hope, affirmation of integrity, decency and faith in God - only a character who has morally defied humanity and God is punished. This effect on the audience was crucial to Hamlet's purpose and, while still relevant today, is only completely effective in the Elizabethan context.” - Sam.

Important quotes
ACT 3
Pages 40 - 44
Why does Guildenstern say 'i think we can say we made some headway', while Rosencra. feels 'he made us look ridiculous' ?

What is the point of the discussion about direction and time? (pp. 42 - 43)
This scene is about how Hamlet is confident and is more intelligent than both Ros. and Guil. As for direction and time, in terms of context, Ros. and Guil. was made in a time where nuclear holocaust was real and that their was no hope and people did not know what to do. Ros and guil a directed by the king and fail at everything.

When they are asked to find Hamlet's madness, they fail. When they are asked to get Polonius body and bring Hamlet, Guil. pants fall down. The final task is to send Ham. to England and they fail at that too. All this time when they are given directions they fail, but in scene ii Act iii they are given a chance to act, to make and difference, but they choose not to. They need direction. They feel they can't make difference, "he is mortal, death comes to us all...he's just one man among many." They use all the philosophies to not do anything and when their own death warrant comes about, they use the same philosophies to not save themselves. –WouldBeDoctor

Refering to the themes, death, uncertainty, action/inaction... etc. Some "Ros...dead" quotes are, "Life in a box is better than no life at all... at least you have a chance."

"Eternity is a terrible thought, I mean where does it end."

"No no no, thats not death...death is failing to reappear, now you see me now you don't thats what's real."

"Now you see me now you..."

"he is only one man...death may be nice..." –WouldBeDoctor

I think to fully understand the R&G quote you need to read a few lines about it

Player: I should concentrate on not losing your heads
Guil: Do you speak from knowledge
Player: Precedent...And i know which way the wind is blowing
Guil: Operating on two levels are we?!

It seems to me that this is self-referentation (ie the text acknowledging its self as a text) The player makes reference to the fact he has "been here before" (ie he was here in Shakespeares original text) and the "precedent" he speaks of is hsi knowledge (as well as the audiences') about R&G's eventual fate

"I know which way the wind is blowing" refers to this again, as a term that that implies the Player knows what is going to happen. I figure the 2nd level is the fact that he does in fact know more about his direction than Ros and Guil do of theirs (remember that in previous pages R&G had been discussing where the wind was coming from in order to work out direction)

Not only does the player know what is going to happen (meaning one) but he also has greater knowledge of his direction on life (meaning two) –shinkei

Past paper questions

2005 HSC:
How does Stoppard’s Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead sustain interest in the values represented in Shakespeare’s Hamlet?

2005 catholic trial:
'A transformed text reflects its own context. In doing so it highlights the different context of its original.'

2004 HSC:
'How has your perception of Transformations been illuminated by your comparative study of the prescribed texts?'

2003 HSC:
You have studied two texts composed at different times.

When you compared these texts and their contexts, how was your understanding of each texts developed and reshaped?

2002 HSC:
In comparing your TWO texts you will have become aware of how the contexts of the texts have shaped their form and meaning. Of more interest, perhaps, is a comparison of the values associated with each text.

To what extent has this point of view been your experience in your study of Transformations?

2002 Trial:
1) “Reading a text from the past presents us with a problem. If we read it from a modern viewpoint we often find that the text can no longer speak to us in the 21st century. If we try to make ourselves into a reader of the past we turn the text into a fake antique.”

How do you respond to this statement? Illustrate your point by referring to your TWO prescribed texts.

2) Is the contemporary transformation you have studied anything more than a shadow of the classic text on which it was based?

3) A critic has presented the following viewpoint:
“It is surprising how transformations of texts into new texts usually reinforce the same values, even though their contexts may be vastly different.”

4) How has the context of the contemporary text affected the way it has transformed the earlier text?

Imagine you have carried out a radio interview with the composer of your prescribed contemporary text. In the interview you have explored the accuracy of this statement in relation to the process of transformation. Write the script of the interview.

Miscellaneous:
'Transformed texts illuminate and illustrate ideas that may not be explored in the original text.'

________________________________________
REMEMBER at the end of the day YOU are the one that has to make the effort to read the texts, learn the quotes, write the practice essays and remember your notes. No one else can do this for you. Ultimately, YOU remain responsible for YOUR own learning.

As more questions are asked/answered, I will be adding to this FAQ so please don’t hesitate to supply me with any information!

Caitlin2022 · Dec 17, 2007

SCENE ANALYSIS

Opening of Hamlet (up to pg 95)(Natural order, truth)

Disruption of natural order, plunging into chaos
Unnatural death → appearance of Ghost “In the same figure like the king that’s dead” (Bernado pg. 89)- this would have been shocking, like treason to the audience
“This bodes some eruption to our state”- (Horatio pg.90) foreshadows disruption
Believing in Ghosts goes against Christian belief however it was a superstition that was believed in at the time
Hamlet doubt the ‘honesty’ of the ghost because of his continued scepticism
“The Spirit that I have seen may be a devil- and that devil hath power t’assume a pleasing shape”
Pathetic fallacy “tis bitter cold’
Disease imagery “his wits diseased and the queen thinks of her sick soul”- disturbance of moral order

Hamlet feigns madness and word games to Polonius (truth)

“Do you know me, my lord?” “Excellent well, y’are a fishmonger”- Hamlet’s tone is sarcastic, no one in the court as they appear to be
“To be honest, as this world goes, it to be one man picked out of ten thousand.”
“Still harping on my daughter”- Polonius misses the point completely and falls for Hamlet’s deception
“What do you read my Lord?” “Words, words, words”
“What is the matter, my Lord?” “Between who?” “I mean the matter that you read, my lord.”
“You cannot sir take from me anything that I will more willingly part withal; except my life, except my life, except my life.”- Repetition emphasis the point and foreshadows Hamlet’s contemplation of suicide

Hamlet’s main soliloquy (death, religion)

Focus of life on earth is to get to heaven
Soliloquy’s expose the inner thoughts and feelings of characters that would not otherwise be expressed in Elizabethan theatre
Iambic pentameter- ordered structure reflects the chain of being
Powerful emotive words “suffer”, “outrageous fortune”
“The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune”- the predicament he is in (metaphor)
Strange order “To die, to sleep- to sleep, perchance to dream” reflects the disruption of the natural order
“Thus conscience does and make cowards of us all”- includes the audience and Hamlet together
Cumulative listing of life’s problems “The pangs of disprized love, the law’s delay, the insolence of office”
“bare bodkin”- alliteration of the ‘b’ sound makes this stand out as we are struck with the horror of what he is contemplating
“Dread of something after death” “Undiscovered country”- - his fear of going to hell
“Native hue of resolution”- assonance makes it sound dramatic and important
“Pale cast of thought”- monosyllabic, slow pace shows his deliberation

Closing scene, death of Hamlet (death, religion, restoration of order)

Death is dramatic- “this pearl is thine, heres to thine health”- theatrical, reverence, structure, order.
Situational irony that Gertrude drinks the poison intended for Hamlet
Nobility in death- “born to the stage like a soldier”
Death is not the end but a place of consequence, biblical allusions- “and flights of angels sing”
Death is certain- inevitable “I am dead, Horatio”-morally/spiritually/physically
Even after all the turmoil and chaos he finds answers in that there is a “divinity that shapes our ends”- it is an optimistic era of turbulent innovation
Horatio was able to restore order because of the Christian worldview and there was a distinct moral order as God was able to fix it. The tragic end of the play comments on the effect of this destruction and the consequences of challenging preordained order “thou livest report me any my chores are right to be unsatisfied.”

Opening of Ros and Guil (chaos, religion)

Coin tossing- chaos laws of probability are non existent as science/maths are the fundamental basis of late 20th C society therefore if you can’t rely on probability you can’t rely on anything
“A weaker man might be moved to re-examine his faith, if in nothing else at leas in the law of probability”
“Ros betrays no surprise at all- he feels none… Guil is well alive to the oddity of it. He is not worried about the money, but he is worried about the implications”- burlesque
Setting- post modern theatre, no identity- “a place without any visible character”
Decisions- “heads… heads… heads” left to chance however there is no chance and we have no control
Language is modern this contrasts with clothes and is an anachronism which subverts the importance of Shakespeare.

Word game (chaos, identity)

Ros- “I feel like a spectator”- powerless
“Words, words. They’re all we have to go on”- Allusion to Hamlet’s speech and word games and they can’t rely on words, they can’t rely on anything
Turning language and communication into a game shows it is meaningless “Foul! No repetitions. Three-love. First game to…”- he doesn’t know
“What in the God’s name is going on?”- Rhetoric, Guil really has no idea
“Is there a choice? Is there a God?”- Non-sequiturs imply chaos
“Guil (seriously) What’s your name?”- Lack of identity
Fast paced tone of the scene conveys the speed of 20th century life
“It’s all questions.”- They don’t know anything
Repetition of the word matter, “Doesn’t it matter why it matters?” “What’s the matter with you?” used as a homonym, conveys confusion, as even the audience can’t follow them anymore. Same thing done in Hamlet with the word “matter”

Meeting the players (identity, comment on British theatre)

“You don’t understand the humiliation of it – to be tricked out of the one assumption which makes our existence viable – that somebody is watching…” - we are too busy watching ourselves in the 20th century “We pledged our identities, secure in the conventions of our trade; that someone would be watching. And then, gradually, no one was.”
“There we are – demented children mincing about in clothes that no one ever wore, speaking as no man ever spoke, swearing love in wigs and rhymed couplets… We ransomed our dignity to the clouds.”- Comment on British theatre, not an accurate representation of life
“We’re actors – we’re the opposite of people!”
“Silence. Then Guil claps solo with slow measure irony.”- Situational irony, life is a stage, don’t know what is real

Ros & Guil ‘dead in a box’ scene (death, existentialism)

Society has become desensitised to death following the war
Death is insignificant
“Life in a box is better than no life at all”- transformation of Christian world view to secular society with existentialist world view
Pun- “eternity is a terrible thought. I mean where is it going to end”- demonstrates how death has been trivialised
Irony linking to lack if control over death- “I forbid anyone to enter” (grand procession enters)
Death is reduced to its physical reality as opposed to Hamlet, where death is glorified through Christian imagery- “lying dead in a box with the lid on it.”
“For all the compasses in the world, there’s only one direction, and time is its only measure. (He reflects, getting more desperate and rapid.)” Ros begins to tell jokes he is interacting with no one and nothing

Ros & Guil closing scene (death)

Death as reduced to the everyday because of the cold war- the boat is a metaphor for death, false hope it will give them understanding- “no applause, only silence… that’s death”
Inevitability- end of WWII, “we were dead lucky there”- pun
World of uncertainty- not even sure if he’s dead “he’s dead as fas as we’re concerned”- we don’t see there deaths
“It doesn’t sound very plausible”
Guil: “Shut up I’m sick of it do you think conversation will help us now”
Doesn’t get to finish speech at end as order is not restored will never be restored. Because natural laws are not fixed.
See dead tragedians at the end- allusion to Hamlet’s final scene

Caitlin2022 · Dec 17, 2007

Hamlet

Themes:

Illusion vs. Reality [Duplicity (Duality)]
Disease/Corruption [madness/death/murder]
Action vs. Inaction [Procrastination][Man vs. “Nature”]
Order vs. Disorder [politics/human condition]

Characters

· Many of the characters are not what they seem (appearance vs. reality issue) consider who is not what he/she seems.
· Consider the function of characters:

- - Horatio: witness as measure of the truth (for audience) as reliable commentator who will see the truth is told at the end
  - The Ghost: as dramatic device to set up the action/conflict for Hamlet to reflect the state of disorder Denmark has been plunged in to.

Placement of the audience

We see much of the action “through Hamlet’s eyes”. How does this affect our opinion of him? Do we agree with all his opinions as a result? Do you agree with all of his self-criticism? Do you agree that Claudius is without guilt? If not how is it that the audience can have a view that is different to and independent of Hamlet’s?
Consider the soliloquies they allow the audience to hear the private and therefore presumably truthful thoughts of a character. What do soliloquies reveal to us about
- Hamlet
- Claudius
- Ophelia

Why did Shakespeare give us these soliloquies?

Use of dramatic irony: at what points in the play dies they audience know things the character doesn’t?
- - Polonius hidden behind a curtain
  - The final scene

What is this effect on the audience?

Always try and visualise what the audience would see on the stage and hear (in terms of tone and voice)

Structure-Themes

- The overall structure of the play as an example of “revenge tragedy”.
- The use of sub plots to reflect main issue of revenge- thereby increasing dramatic tension.
- Plots as, action and/or psychological
- Construction via parallels:
  - Hamlet, Laertes and Fortinbras have each lost their father.

Contrasts:

- - The different ways Hamlet and Laertes respond to revenge.
  - Hamlet’s “antic disposition” and Ophelia’s madness.

Overwhelming prevalence of duality

Hamlet’s inner struggle: Hamlet is an agent on the target of revenge; Hamlet as a contemplative man vs. active man; riddles, puns etc in language;
Pairing of characters: Rosencrantz and Gilderstone and the two women
Profound ironies present; Hamlet does not kill Claudius “at prayer”: a sign of determination or weakness?
Themes: justice vs. revenge, action vs. inaction, ambiguities of the human condition; appearance vs. reality is it a play about life and death?

The use of play within a play- how does this underscore

o Theme: appearance vs. reality
o Plot: provoke action-revenge

What is the central conflict of the play?
Where is the climax of the play?
The visual effect of scenes eg. The final tableau with dead bodies littering the stage effect?

Use of Language

To reveal character- eg. Polonius’ proverbs
To reveal themes- eg. Double entendre on act = a deed

= a performance

Imagery- disease/corruption
Man is beast
Nature
Flowers
War
Use of prose/verse (blank verse) –consider:
- - - - When it changes
        
        What the change signifies

The generally interrogative mood of the play- what does this suggest?

smithers17 · Mar 19, 2008

thanks , you're a champ! this was soooo much help in my synopsis

whatusername? · Mar 22, 2008

can someone please explain this to me:
Ros and Guil was written i the times of existentialist philosophy- and this heavily influences the play- "the only beginning is life and the only end is death". part of existentialism is the belief that there is no preordained fate- that we make our own.
ok fair enough
but another aspect of the play is that they exist within the confines set by the Shakespeare in his creation of Hamlet- a play outside a play- and thus they are preordained to walk the path created by shakespeare

scaredytiger · Mar 24, 2008

whatusername? said:
...part of existentialism is the belief that there is no preordained fate- that we make our own.
ok fair enough
but another aspect of the play is that they exist within the confines set by the Shakespeare in his creation of Hamlet- a play outside a play- and thus they are preordained to walk the path created by shakespeare

you are confusing fate with predetermination.

fate = someone in the sky has a pattern which humans play out
ie. god decided this was what was going to happen

predetermination = because of the way people and events are, things will happen a certain way
eg. Sally is bad at maths. She doesn't choose Mathematics Ext. 2.

yes, i have lame examples.

but because r&g have these human incapabilities (they cannot create their own purpose - ros doesnt want to and guil lacks the initiative to put his thoughts into action) they fail to stop their own deaths.

Ros and Guil are Hamlet revisited. Ros represents the mind of societal convention. He will do anything he is told. He is quite happy with action, just not with original thought. Guil is very philosophical, representing the breaking of convention, but cannot act on his thoughts. It is the seperating of Hamlet into these two elements that stops them from changing the action.

Ros = Action
Guil = Thought
Hamlet = Thought + (eventual) Action
Thought + Action = Initiative

this initiative to create ones own purpose is where existentialism comes in. the idea of it doesnt have to be exemplified in the characters - Hamlet wasnt the best example of revenge in a revenge tragedy; Ros&Guil dont create their own purpose at any point in the play - it merely has to be explored, so the audience can see/think about it.

i hope im not rambling and this helps you.

Shoubadoo · Aug 12, 2008

Thanks for these notes, how very helpful!

stephthompson12 · Oct 19, 2008

thanks for these notes!

helped alot!

valnovak · Oct 19, 2008

could someone just give me a little bit of advice about the
CONTEXT of rosencrantz and guildenstern are dead and hamlet?

like specifically in relation to the theme of
fate and destiny and
death

because i have no idea what i'm talking about....

FAQ - Transformations - Hamlet / Rosencrantz & Guildenstern (1 Viewer)

grk_styl

is hating uni & study

Caitlin2022

New Member

Caitlin2022

New Member

smithers17

New Member

whatusername?

Member

scaredytiger

WWKD

Shoubadoo

Member

stephthompson12

Member

valnovak

New Member

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)