Transformations of texts have occurred for centuries, as stories have been adapted to contemporary situations, while the inspiration of the known reflects upon the new, and the new resonates the known, styles are manufactured to give the former work a creative edge, not to mention a change in perspective. Tom Stoppard changed Hamlet, a Shakespearean tragedy, into Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead, an Absurdity piece, in an attempt to make sense of contemporary society through a canonical text. Stoppard transformed themes and issues, characters and techniques, emphasising the intricacies of modern life, creating a new perspective on arguably the most well known play in history. Altering the philosophies of Hamlet, abandoning both, structure and development within the parameters of the stage, creating an importance for the? bit-players? instead of monitoring life from the top, Stoppard took Shakespeare? s idea and made it new and inviting to the contemporary age. The transformation of genres gives Hamlet, the story, a modern feel, and one, which the contemporary audience can relate to. Hamlet was a tragedy by definition although a transformation of Thomas Kyd? s 1587 play Prototype of a Revenge Tragedy, containing definite stages of development, with the expectation of resolution.
The Essay on Hamlet Rosencrantz And Guildenstern Transformations
... the text. It is the transformation of a canonical text like Shakespeare's Hamlet that allows contemporary responders to achieve a heightened ... classics's eaves to satirist elements of Shakespeare's canonical text, Stoppard manages to reaffirm and pay homage to its underlying ... timeless tragedy Hamlet, the central characters innocent mind is corrupted by the evils of those around him. The tragedy of his ...
It paralleled the social context of the Seventeenth Century, where the general belief was that things occurred for distinct reasons, and the eventual? right-turning? of the hierarchy triangle or Chain of Being would set things back to normal. Stoppard broke the Shakespearean trait of righting wrongs by presenting Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead as an Absurdist piece with no resolution, no development, and no direction. We have a complex genre, a comedy which ends in tragedy, and we have two characters whose fatal flaw is not an internal one, but one that has been inflicted upon them. This way of showing life is very modern, as the Twenty-first Century psyche dwells on the questioning of everything, and the absoluteness of direction is hardly ever equated with contemporary society. We see Hamlet the character in the original script, totally obsessed by what he should do concerning his father? s murder. His whole being is forwarded by his adamant necessity for revenge for his father? s murder.
His soliloquies are speeches collaborating with the audience, breaking down the fourth wall, in order to make sense of the people who have wronged him. He knows there is correct protocol in his position, and he makes sure he does the right thing, when he strikes. This is the Seventeenth Century way of perceiving life. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, however, are completely obsessed with finding out their role, and where they fit into the scheme of things. They have no idea of what they are to achieve, where they are to go and what action to take. Where Hamlet holds the illusion of choice and control over his life, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern rely on other characters for their direction.
They are constantly confused and have no control over their actions. It is as though Stoppard is the foreigner that wakes up these minor characters taking the role of god, in Hamlet and inverts the narrative of Hamlet, and indeed our perceptions of the earlier play. When Rosencrantz states, ? We have no control. None at all? , it stands as being a profound realisation of contemporary society and shows that we now do onstage things the things that are supposed to happen off. The manner in which issues are brought to light are different in both plays.
The Essay on Hamlet Bryce Nations Rosencrantz And Guildenstern
... of a royal family and ultimately their own deaths. Through Rosencrantz and Guildenstern we learn many lessons of the laws of ... Crumbling Castle Hamlet Hamlet Bryce Nations 4/28/00 Smith Lit 112 Crumbling Castle Hamlet is a complex play with many characters that each ... the obvious puzzles in life. When trying to demonstrate the difference in which objects fall, Rosencrantz says, "You would think ...
An example of this is the theme of mortality. Characters die throughout Hamlet, and in Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead, the protagonists speak about death throughout the entire play. Hamlet? s most famous speech, ? To be or not to be? soliloquy in Act III, Scene i, explores the advantages and disadvantages of living. Hamlet considers ending the torture of his life.
Yet he is stopped by the fear of the unknown. Stoppard transforms Hamlet? s speech about death into a number of different ideas in his play. Rosencrantz muses about death when he imagines being dead in a box. He fears death because his imagination only allows him to picture being alive in a box. He reaches Hamlet? s conclusion that life must be preferable to death, and says, ? Life in a box is better than no life at all, I? d expect. You? d have a chance at least.
? This image of being trapped in a box becomes a metaphor for Rosencrantz and Guildenstern? s life, as they can? t leave the stage because they will simply cease to exist. This idea of being trapped also appears in Hamlet, when he talks about being? bounded in a nutshell? . This idea of death has been transformed from one genre, to the next. The audience understands it, much like Hamlet? s was understood.
The context may have changed, but the idea has remained relatively the same. Yet one idea about death changes from Hamlet to Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead. The portrayal of death in Shakespeare? s Hamlet involves violence, blood, poisoning and duels, which is a stark contrast to Stoppard? s image of death as simply an absence. Death to Guildenstern is? just a man failing to reappear, that? s all. ? By transforming the lead characters in his exploration of death, Stoppard has transformed death from the dramatic, to the everyday.
Hamlet and Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead are both preoccupied with the philosophy of language; Hamlet through the many questions and riddles, which reveal the main character? s state of uncertainty, and Rosencrantz and Guildenstern? s through their word games, never increasing their levels of emotion, so that they remain outside the direction. When Guildenstern says? Words. That? s all we? ve got? , he is attempting to find some meaning in his life. Language in the Absurdist world becomes one more unpredictable, unreliable deceiving feature of experience.
The Essay on Rosencrantz Guildenstern Fate Coin Idea
Fate in Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead (Topic #2) Player: ... there s a design at work in all art, surely you know that. Events must play themselves out to an aesthetic, moral and logical conclusion. (24). Fate is an idea explored frequently by William Shakespeare in his literary works and by many other famous tragedy writers. Even though Tom Stoppard s play Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are ...
Stoppard includes large portions of Shakespeare, which exaggerates the gulf between the Seventeenth and Twentieth Century language. For example, when Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are welcomed by Claudius and Gertrude in Act I after the Shakespearean lines, ? Your visitation shall receive such thanks/ As fits a king? s remembrance? , Rosencrantz mutters the simple? I want to go home. ? Stoppard manages to manipulate the language in such a way that, instead of being awed by Shakespeare we are forced to take a more lighthearted view of what is taking place within Hamlet. Similar to Hamlet, many of the questions within Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead are rhetorical. Yet Rosencrantz and Guildenstern take their meaning from the level of the play to the level of real life. When Rosencrantz asks? What? s the game? ? , and Guildenstern replies? Where are the rules? ? , they are not simply referring to the word game, but to life in general.
The transformation of Hamlet into Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead led to the change in how issues were presented to the audience. By effectively taking a canonical text apart and filling it with contemporary ideas, yet still working from the same themes, audiences seem much more aware of how life affects them as not only an individual, but as a whole. From the breakdown of Denmark in Hamlet, the famous quote, ? Something is rotten in the state of Denmark? , to the Twenty-first Century breakdown of society. Reality is, all of a sudden, portrayed in stage to such an extreme, that it is somehow absurd.
By using alternative techniques to present issues, the ability to reach a contemporary audience is extended, and effective. Therefore suggesting that Stoppard is not Hamlet? s? dying voice? but offering us the voices of the? bit players? , Hamlet has indeed been redesigned for modern consumption, played in a very post-modernist way, our perspectives enlarged so that we can see both? heads and tails? .
