Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead

In addition to the pain Hamlet and John had endured because of their mothers, they both had to overcome the people who intended to use them. For Hamlet this meant suppressing information from the bothersome Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. Upon the king’s request these two friends of Hamlet are sent off in an attempt to relieve Hamlet’s sorrow. However Hamlet soon discovers that they have alternative motives. They are strictly set out to discover the cause for Hamlet’s depression and madness, and don’t even attempt to enlighten his spirits.

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 also sow the seeds of their own destruction by betraying their lifelong friend. From their point of view of course, they are being loyal to the king. They are faithful, obedient subjects, merely doing services to their king, trying to find out the reason for Hamlet’s madness. To Hamlet however, their willingness to do the King’s bidding is just more evidence of the corruption of the court. He urges them to treat him as a friend, to be loyal to him, to tell him the truth-;’were you not sent for?’ They eventually and reluctantly agree that they were sent for. But this is not the last of it. They continue to do the King’s bidding,

     Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are two of Hamlets childhood buddies who when asked by the king, try to find out what is troubling their friend. The two of them go to Hamlet pretending to be his friends, when in all actuality they are only there because the king asked them to find the truth. Hamlet realizes their purpose for their visit is to find the real reason for his sadness as of late. As the play continues the twins are asked again by the king to go to Hamlet and try again to find the real reason for Hamlets behavior. Hamlet insults them at every chance knowing they are lying to him about their purpose of the visit. "Tis as easy as lying; govern these

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

Rosencrantz and Guildenstern were present when Hamlet spoke to the head player about adding a few lines to the play "The Murder of Gonzago." They did not actually hear what those lines were to be, but surely they could not help but realize that the king's anger during the play was probably related to the changes Hamlet made. When the king rose in anger and left, he was followed by everyone except Hamlet and Horatio. Hamlet, of course, was not concerned for the king, since he knew the cause of his anger. Horatio's heart was turned toward Hamlet, so he also remained behind. Had Rosencrantz and Guildenstern been loyal to Hamlet, they would have remained behind also, but ambition sent them after the man

The main theme of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are dead is the complexity of life, death, and the events that lead to it. It also depicts the theory of determinism vs. free will. These are very similar to the themes seen in Hamlet.

In the excerpt taken from Hamlet, Shakespeare uses a hostile tone to depict the relationship between Hamlet and the people he is speaking to. The author uses figurative syntax, descriptive detail, and vexed diction to show the sanity of Hamlet based on the relationships with those he interacts with. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are trying to uncover Hamlet’s mental state thinking that Hamlet has no idea but Hamlet is always one step ahead of those in the house.

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..." 

This theme of death is what drives the play along; it fulfills the expectations for a tragedy, which is the genre that Hamlet fits into. The inevitability and commonness of death, as suggested by Hamlet in these lines, fit into the context of the play the most. Hamlet’s speech foreshadows the fate awaiting the main characters, one that does not bestow mercy on any of them. By the end of the play, they are all dead, nullifying any power they might have had over each other. Fortinbras arrives soon afterwards, and even

Throughout my high school career, I’ve never worked with anything that has made me think so much. Sure, you can watch the play Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead at face value, have a few laughs until it stops being funny, and then go on with your life. But you aren’t getting out of it all that Tom Stoppard intended. This play is so much more than just an accompanying work to Hamlet. It fleshes out the characters of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern in a way that makes you consider your own life! And if you really want to take anything from this play, you need to understand the messages it contains. This is a challenge to some, because of how deeply they contrast with the play at face value. But, if you can look deeper, you will a couple

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

Shakespeare writes in a way that is difficult to understand for anyone that speaks the modern language. His story Hamlet is understood through the emotions felt by his characters. Hamlet is the main character who is conflicted with revenge and conspiring friendships. Hamlet returns home from Germany for his father’s funeral only to find far more troubling things. Hamlet is a conflicted character but that doesn’t stop him from knowing what he wants. Revenge is the main cause of his confliction but with great reason, which is important to understand about this play because it helps explain all the betrayal and tragedy.

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-

Rosencrantz, Guildenstern, and the players have a few subtle interactions in which the idea of fate is addressed strongly. Late in the play Guildenstern gets extremely angry at the players saying, “I 'm talking about death---and you 've never experienced that. And you cannot act it. You die a thousand casual deaths---with none of that intensity which squeezes out life” (123). Here Guildenstern not only implies that to have such knowledge of death he must have already experienced it himself, but he gets outraged over the fact death is not something that is acted, it is something that happens tragically, even accidentally with no way of truly knowing how to act such a thing. He proposes that death, and arguably the life before it must be at the