Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead: Fate

Because they did not heed to the warning, they subsequently arranged their own downfall.  The incident with the coin flips, in turn cause the reader not to sympathize with Rosencrantz and Guildenstern at the conclusion of the narrative.  Other reasons the reader may not sympathize is because of the characters' unfaithfulness to their friend Hamlet.  This is another way the coin flips tie into Rosencrantz and Guildenstern's downfall.   From the principles of probability, one would expect for heads to turn up in so many amount of coin flips fifty percent of the time.   The fact that it did not signifies the event's unfaithfulness to the rules of probability.  This reflects Rosencrantz and Guildenstern's unloyalty to Hamlet.  They were like fools to ignore the event that was as conspicuous as a red light.  Consequently, they died a fool's death.

Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are foils to Hamlet. The two are introduced as friends to Hamlet. But also they are like messengers for the king. Hamlet learns of their

There is a complementary structure between Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are dead and Hamlet in the sense that, they are written in different time periods and show different understanding on the subject at hand. In 1602, the time when Hamlet was written, people believed in church and that dead would go to heaven or hell based on their deeds , but Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are dead was written in 1960’s a time of existentialism, when existence of god and essence of life were questioned.

Hamlet’s childhood friends, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern both try to deceive Hamlet. However, their unskilled uses of dishonesty and disloyalty have resulted in their ironic death. They are introduced in the beginning of Act 2, Scene 2 as Hamlet’s childhood friends who are sent for by King Claudius for their services. When they first meet Hamlet and are asked the reason for their arrival, they answer: “To visit you, my lord, no other occasion” (2.2.78). However, Hamlet has already seen through their attempted act of trying to fool him and then replies: “You were sent/for, and there is a kind of confession in your looks, which/ you modesties have not craft enough

In the end, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are naively loyal to Hamlet, and this becomes their downfall. They know that Hamlet has killed Polonius, and yet, they take no precautions as they accompany Hamlet to England. Their trust in both Claudius and Hamlet gets them killed. Hamlet’s reveals his mistrust of his schoolmates in a conversation with his mother, and refers to Rosencrantz and Guildenstern as, "...my two-school fellows, whom I will trust as adders fanged..." 

Rosencrantz and Guildenstern were ordered by Claudius to find out where Hamlet put Polonius’ body. However, they have learned nothing because Hamlet was not willing to give them an answer. Instead, Hamlet mocked them by calling them

In the play, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are dead, it starts out with the guys sitting around flipping coins, then as the story progresses they realize they were summoned by the king and decide they must go without a knowledge of what is awaiting them or what will happen along the way. “We were sent for...too late for what?...how do I know? We haven’t got there yet” (18). It is odd to think that I can be motivated by such a non-sensical play such as this, but I can relate. With the year coming to a close I had been planning on serving an LDS mission, but as they do, my plans took a sharp turn when I realized I had “foes” to conquer, now with my head spinning and real life approaching at top speed I get the same feeling I’m sure Ros and Guil felt when they got their mysterious letter. The lesson i learned is that when the guys realized they had been summoned they overcame fear with curiosity, saying they wouldn’t know what is going to happen until it happened. I can take this advice, into my own battle with my future and not be afraid of what is going to happen and be more curious about what i’m going to get to do.

Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are incredibly indecisive, and they just get dragged away by the currents on the river of life. They are always being told what to do and where to go, and they never question it. They never stop and think, maybe, we don’t have to do this. Unfortunately, they don’t notice this until too late. Once they knew they were doomed, Guildenstern reminisces that at some point, there had to have been a time where they could have said no; where they could have stopped all of this from happening. It didn’t matter anymore though. They were done. This play is saying that people need to take charge of their lives, and make their own decisions. Don’t just let life pass you by.

Rosencrantz and Guildenstern were two characters in the play who were justly punished. These two were supposed to be friends of Hamlet. They turned on him with one simple request from the King. I feel no remorse for them after Hamlet's little scheme. I find it ironic and reflective of their ending when the Ambassador comes and says, ."..Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are dead. Where should we have our thanks?" (5,2,411-12) This is somewhat humorous because

Rosencrantz and Guildenstern also looked to the King and Queen for approval. They didn't resort to the use of a daughter, but on the use of a close friendship. They used their bond with Hamlet to get information that the Court wanted. Claudius and Gertrude were very convincing in telling Rosencrantz and Guildenstern of how Hamlet was suffering, telling them that "[Their] visitation shall receive such thanks as fits a king's remembrance (P.34)". At first Rosencrantz and Guildenstern weren't too keen on selling out their friend. But instead of standing up to the King and Queen, Guildenstern told them that "we both obey and here give ourselves to be commanded (P.34)". They were more interested in doing what was right in the eyes of the Royal Court than doing what right in their eyes. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern weren't just Hamlet's friends; they were greeted by Hamlet as his "excellent good friends (P.40)". Hamlet viewed them in the same regard as he viewed Horatio, one who Hamlet stayed with and loved all through the play. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern didn't seem to care, and used this trust and love by their friend to please Claudius and Gertrude. This neglect of heart by these two characters was not something that they wanted to do for themselves, but something that they did

Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead, written in the 1960s by playwright Tom Stoppard, is a transforation of Shakespeare’s Hamlet. Stoppard effectively relocates Shakespeare’s play to the 1960s by reassessing and revaluating the themes and characters of Hamlet and considering core values and attitudes of the 1960s- a time significantly different to that of Shakespeare. He relies on the audience’s already established knowledge of Hamlet and transforms a revenge tragedy into an Absurd drama, which shifts the focus from royalty to common man. Within Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead, Stoppard uses a play within a play to blur the line that defines reality, and in doing so creates confusion both onstage- with his characters, and offstage-

Hamlet is undoubtedly one of the most well-studied and remembered tragedies in all of history. Renowned for its compelling soliloquies and thought-provoking discussions about life, death, and love, the play takes a very serious look at the topics it presents. Based on this famous work is another tragedy, known as Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead. In this work, which is interwoven with the original, the namesake characters bumble about in the immense world, over which they have no control. Without a sense of identity or purpose, the two merely drift to and fro at the whim of the larger forces around them; namely Hamlet, who eventually leads them to death. The twin plays follow the same story and end with the same result – nine deaths.

“To be or not to be – that is the question…” (III, I, 56-) so starts Hamlet’s most famous and well-known soliloquy. In Shakespeare’s Hamlet, written in the very late 1500’s, the audience is introduced to two “comical” characters at the beginning of the play; Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. These two characters, clearly, had no clue of what is going on throughout the play; in addition, they followed orders without questioning them. Therefore, their role in the play was not clear. Ultimately, their role in the play was to support, as well as spy, on Hamlet, hence them taking orders from greater characters like Claudius. However, the comic duo serves a deeper purpose than just assisting their old childhood friend. Arguably, their role in the play is also to forecast ideas, bring out character traits to help readers understand them more, and come up with solutions to some of the questions that the play has left the readers to deal with. They are capable of accomplishing that due to their disloyal behaviors towards other characters.

It is human nature to question the meaning of life and for the individual to question their own purpose. The phrase “fate or free will” often comes up when questioning ones purpose in life. Is life predetermined and the individual has no control? Or rather can the individual take charge and choose their own path in life. Existentialists believe that humans are born first and that life is meaningless until the individual defines their own purpose. It is the belief that one's existence precedes one’s essence. In both the late 16th century play Hamlet and Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead (a play within a play based on Hamlet) ideas of existentialism are explored. The later play builds upon the ideals developed in Hamlet and confirms that Hamlet is indeed an existential play. This is evident as the main characters Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are more object like than human and can therefore be considered existential objects, which then forces readers to look at Hamlet as an existential hero. This is because Rosencrantz and Guildenstern exist only in the present and lack free will, in contrast to Hamlet. Both Rosencrantz and Guildenstern question the absurdity of life and death and what it all means, much like how Hamlet explored the absurd. Tom Stoppard meticulously crafted the two minor characters in Shakespeare's Hamlet and put them center stage in his own play and gave them existential object qualities, which was contrast to Hamlet’s character and confirms the idea

Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are never in control of their situations. As the beginning, Rosencrantz were flipping the coin and afterwards they meet the players. The stage suddenly took Rosencrantz