English
Home > English > Advanced > Module A: Comparative Study of Texts & Context > Elective 1: Transformations > Hamlet & Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are dead
Hamlet
and
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead
This unit was prepared by David Eldridge, Hornsby Girls High
School
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead is a
transformation of
Hamlet. In exploring this,
students should focus on
values, ideas, form and
language. You should also explore how
context has
affected the transformation and how it has affected our
readings of the two plays.
Syllabus
Transformation
Context
Values activity
Ideas activity
Form
Language
Readings
Syllabus
These notes attempt to focus on the following the phrases in the
Syllabus and
Prescriptions Booklet. One or more of
them could be the basis for the HSC question.
- “compare texts in order to explore them in relation to
their contexts”
- “develops students' understanding of the effects of
context and questions of value”
- “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”
- “study of the language of texts, consideration of
purposes and audiences, and analysis of the content, values and
attitudes conveyed through a range of readings”
- “transformations of texts have occurred for centuries
as stories have been adapted to contemporary
situations”
- “the inspiration of the known reflects upon the new,
while the new resonates with the known”.

Transformation
Hamlet
It is important to note that
Hamlet itself is a
transformation, of form as well as ideas, which is based upon
other transformations. Indeed the metatheme of
Hamlet is
transformation (whereas
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are
Dead is about the inability to effect transformation or
change). Tom McAlindon, in an article entitled
What is a
Shakespearean Tragedy, draws our attention to the fact that
Hamlet, like Shakespeare's other tragedies, has an intense
focus on the phenomenon of change:
... change is not just one of worldly fortunes; it is above
all else interpersonal, moral, and psychological change. An
essential part of the hero's experience is the horrified
discovery that the world he knows and values, the people he loves
and trusts, are changing or have changed utterly. He feels
cheated and betrayed ‘to the very heart of loss'.
(p.6)
Shakespeare was writing in the tradition of
Revenge
Tragedy, sometimes referred to as
Theatre of the
Blood. Elizabethan and Jacobean versions of revenge tragedy
borrowed heavily from the tragedies of Seneca (4 BC–65 AD),
a Roman dramatist whose tragedies were published in 1581. Seneca,
in turn, based his tragedies on Greek mythology and he appeared
to have been influenced by Aristotle (384–322 BC). Students
should acquaint themselves with the features of these
tragedies.
Shakespeare borrowed, and indeed transformed his tragedies from
the classical form in a number of ways, such as the inclusion of
comic elements (comic relief, satire, mocking, parody etc), the
“common man” character and showing on stage acts of
violent passion.
Shakespeare also appears to have borrowed quite extensively from
a contemporary of his, Thomas Kyd (1558–1594) whose revenge
tragedy
The Spanish Tragedy was not only enormously
popular but very influential to all in the Elizabethan and
Jacobean drama industry.

Rosencrantz and
Guildenstern are Dead
Stoppard has written three, what some would refer to as
irreverent, transformations of Shakespeare's tragedies:
Dogg's Hamlet, Cahoot's Macbeth and Rosencrantz
and Guildenstern Are Dead. This enterprise is quite audacious
as he is not just transforming plays but modern classics. When
asked why he chose Hamlet he responded:
“[Hamlet] is the most famous play in any language,
it is part of a sort of common mythology”.
Stoppard also writes in a tradition; in his case the tradition of
the Theatre of the Absurd. The literary term Theatre of
the Absurd was coined by the critic Martin Esslin and refers
to tendencies in drama to portray life as meaningless and absurd
which emerged in Paris in the late 1940s and early 1950s.
Absurdist Theatre itself can be seen as a transformation of
Dadaism and Surrealism, two early twentieth century aesthetic
philosophies which focused on a sense of bewilderment at the
violence, depravity, and hopelessness they believed endemic to
the human condition in the twentieth century. By challenging
conventional theatre and traditional views The Theatre of the
Absurd attempted to shock the audience into questioning its
own values and assumptions. The drama portrayed was not meant to
be regarded in the same terms as realist drama but rather as a
drama of ideas.Dramatic features often included meaningless
exchanges due to a distrust of language as a means of
communication, aportrayal of life as meaningless through a lack
of dramatic suspense, abstracted and minimalist settings, comic
treatment of traditional themes and a blurring of reality and
fiction. There is often a sense of playfulness at times drawing
attention to their own artifice.
There is also a close link with existentialism. Existentialism is
a philosophical movement that explores the question of existence
and how it is defined, particularly in a world in which meaning
appears to have disappeared. The terrible events of the two World
Wars accelerated the waning of religious faith which had started
with the Enlightenment. There was a general mood of
disillusionment with so called civilised values. The
absurd plays of dramatists such as Ionesco, Genet, Beckett
and Pinter all depict humanity as bewildered and anxious in the
face of a loss of meaning. Stoppard uses Rosencrantz and
Guildenstern are Dead as a vehicle to express these ideas and
draws upon what is probably Shakespeare's most existential
work, Hamlet. Hamlet's famous "To be or not to
be" speech is the intertextual echo that resounds throughout
Stoppard's play.
Stoppard has also appropriated Beckett's influential
absurdist play Waiting for Godot. Rosencrantz and
Guildenstern mirror the predicament of Vladimir and Estragon,
“two lost souls waiting for something to happen”.
They are stranded between modernity and postmodernity. They long
for the security of a grand narrative to make sense of their
lives but can only engage in futile speculation about the meaning
of it all. They are on the verge of a breakthrough to an
acceptance of their postmodern condition of fragmentation, but
don't quite make it.
Stoppard's transformation of Hamlet can be seen as a
formalised 20th century statement regarding the nature
of truth: it is contingent, contextual and ultimately unknowable.
This, of course, is Rosencrantz and Guildenstern's dilemma;
they are trapped in limbo between knowing and not knowing.
Stoppard has been criticised for omitting certain scenes (e.g.
III, ii and iii) which portray Rosencrantz and Guildenstern in a
light other than “two bewildered innocents”. However
it should be remembered Stoppard is interested in Rosencrantz and
Guildenstern as victims. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are
Dead is his creation. He has taken an idea from Hamlet
and developed it dramatically. What he is not interested
in is critiquing Hamlet.
Students should make lists of the scenes in Hamlet which
have been incorporated into Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are
Dead, and write down what has been added and what has been
changed. Then you should consider how these contribute to
Stoppard's purpose.

Context
Hamlet
The flourishing of Revenge Tragedy in Shakespeare's time was
fuelled by the enormous changes taking place in Elizabethan and
Jacobean society. His was an age characterised by turmoil and
uncertainty. The division of the church in England divided the
people into Catholics and Protestants. Religious doubt, albeit
carefully disguised, was becoming more prevalent. The consequent
unrest and suspicion often resulted in surveillance and betrayal
in personal relations as well as in the broader social and
political sphere. Assassination attempts on Elizabeth and James
resulted in cruel and brutal retaliations.
There was also the ever present threat of foreign invasion to add
to the feelings of insecurity.
Medieval feudalism was in decline, but it was dying a defiant
death; the aristocracy resorted to more and more harsh measures
to shore up its authority and maintain the hierarchical order
which had served it so well.
Hamlet dramatically reflects this challenge to tradition, the
political instability of his society and the religious
questioning.
Medieval–renaissance–modern;
feudalism–sceptism–humanism–individualism; old
world moral absolutes–new world rational scepticism;
religious certainties–inner doubt and psychological
probing.
Humanism and notion of identity. Hamlet asks the modern
questions, who am I? and what am I doing here?

Rosencrantz and
Guildenstern are Dead
Stoppard began writing
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are
Dead in 1964 and it was first performed in 1966 at the
Edinburgh Fringe Theatre. The 20
th century, and more
specifically the late 20
th century, was a time of
change and turmoil.
The sixties was characterised by an irreverent mood born out of a
period of rebellion and challenge to existing structures and
beliefs. In all areas of social activity Stoppard's society
(which is mainly first world, capitalist, democratic and
relatively affluent) was undergoing transformation. Many
characterise this historical period as the “turn on, tune
in, drop out” generation because of its experimentation
with drugs, alternative lifestyles and sexually promiscuous
attitudes. Others characterise the sixties as a decade of student
political protest. They cite the anti-Vietnam campaigns, nuclear
disarmament protests and the Paris student riots as important
landmarks in the politicisation of young people. The British
popular culture scene included television comedy in the form of
Monty Python's Flying Circus and England's first
soap opera
Coronation Street, the pop music explosion kick
started by the Beatles, stage musicals such as
Oliver, Joseph
and the Amazing Technicolour Dreamcoat and
Jesus Christ
Superstar.
The mood of questioning, rebellion and playfulness can be seen in
the way that
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead
travesties
Hamlet; the tragedians, serious in their
treatment of Death and holding a “mirror up to life”
in
Hamlet are now reduced to comedians and potential
pornographers in
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead.
The treatment of death has also undergone atransformation from
the profound to the comic, from high tragedy to slapstick
comedy.
20
th Century despair–nihilism–death of
god–existentialism and the notion of identity-swinging
sixties–optimism and
disillusionment–modernism–postmodernism–Theatre
of the Absurd–nonheroic–Rosencrantz and Guildenstern
ask the modern questions, who am I? and what am I doing
here?

Values activity
Find examples and quotations from
both Hamlet and
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead for each of the
following values:
Certainty
- The need to know
- Who am I?
- What am I doing here?
Trust
- The need to trust
- Who to trust?
Truth
- The need to know the truth
- What is the truth?
Friendship
- The need for friendship
- care/share/love/trust/loyalty
In both texts the question is asked: In a world of no
certainties, where things are often not what they seem to be,
what and who can I trust?

Ideas activity
Find examples and quotations from
both Hamlet and
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead for each of the
following ideas:
Change
- Consistency and inconsistency
- Tradition and progress
Hamlet is about change and transition whereas
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead is about the
inability to effect transformation or change. Where Hamlet
undergoes a transformation in perspective and acts to influence
events, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are seen as impotent little
men unable to influence events.
Death
- What is death?
- What is it to die?
Throughout literature there is a strong connection between truth
and death. The quest for meaning is seen in terms of killing and
death. Examine the meaning and value attached to death in the two
plays.
Examine the respective values attached to death in
Hamlet
and
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead. The tragedians
offer yet another view: they see death as the climax of great
tragedy.
Identity
The humanist model (see Liberal Humanist reading below) sees
Hamlet as epitomising the human condition. It takes for
granted a universalism of human nature and identity which
transcends time and place. You may find it more helpful to apply
a post-humanist model to
Hamlet which interprets the play
as positing a particular model of human individuality. Then
examine the model of human individuality in
Rosencrantz and
Guildenstern are Dead. Compare the heroic depiction of
humanity in
Hamlet with Stoppard's antiheroes.
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern have no fixed identities. Stoppard
is exploring the 20
th century notion of existentialism
which is essentially concerned with the problem of self identity.
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern as representatives of the human
condition, have no control over their fate and are the victims of
arbitrary circumstances. They have no past and no future and only
exist through other people's definitions of them, and are
unable to accept the lack of guidance and fashion their own
future out of the here and now. Their existential position is
echoed throughout the play as they continually try to find an
explanation for their existence. In the same way that Hamlet
functions as a metaphor for the human condition so do Rosencrantz
and Guildenstern represent modern humanity's existential
despair.
Providence, fate, destiny
The notions of free will and determinism are central to both
plays.
Hamlet has the free will to act but is thwarted by his belief
system. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern represent the idea that our
lives are predetermined because even though we do have choices in
life, we do not have enough information to choose
intelligently.
Existentialism, religion and the meaning of life
Shakespeare's England was very religious. The Christian
church was an active participant in all areas of social and
political life.
Hamlet too operates in this Christian
context and all events in the play should be regarded in this
light; indeed religious belief is often a instigator or inhibitor
of dramatic action.
The 20
th century is often referred to as the century
that killed God. In Western society there has been a decline in
the number of Christians and of the significance of the church in
everyday life.
You should explore how Stoppard evokes the mood of
20
th century despair through his appropriation of the
philosophical movement called existentialism. By dramatising the
loss of centres resulting in a despairing desire to know and to
believe Stoppard is commenting on the nature of 20
th
century existence.
Appearance and reality, illusion and truth
The player in
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead says,
“truth is only that which is taken to be true. It's the
currency of living. There may be nothing behind it, but it
doesn't make any difference so long as it is honoured. One
acts on assumptions.”
Consider the concept of truth as it is dramatically realised in
Hamlet.
Examine how both plays use things such as imagery, symbols,
clothing, the play-within-a-play device, role-playing and
language to set up mirrors for reality through which to challenge
our notions of illusion and truth.
Appearance and reality is a dominant theme in
Hamlet and
Elizabethan audiences would understand that there is a truth
behind the disguise.
Rational reason and scientific rationalism
Rational reason was the basis of Humanism and was the working
philosophy of Shakespeare's time. Rosencrantz and
Guildenstern attempt to discover patterns and purposes in their
existence by use of scientific logic.
Theatre as a metaphor for life (and the nature of
art)
There are several examples in both plays where the boundaries
between the actors and the audience are erased. Shakespeare and
Stoppard employ metatheatre in order to comment on the analogy
between drama and life: both construct realities.
Hamlet is a theatrical play. It is about acting and, like
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead is full of
theatrical references. Theatrical terminology and imagery
abounds, characters act or attempt to act, characters are
instructed and instruct others in the art of acting, there are
plays within plays and the audience are reminded that it are not
only watching a play but that it might be the actors in someone
else's play! Both playwrights cleverly use structure and form
to draw our attention to the nature of truth and reality.
Stoppard himself is acting upon Shakespeare's text.

Form
Hamlet
The genre–Tragedy–Revenge
Tragedy–Aristotle–Seneca–Elizabethan/Jacobean–Shakespeare
Structure–stagecraft–dramatic techniques (ghost,
soliloquy, play within a
play)–language–imagery–setting
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead
The genre, Theatre of the Absurd, modern and postmodern
characteristics (pastiche, irony, parody, word games, vaudeville,
burlesque, self reflexivity, absence of a frame of
reference)
Intertextuality (
The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock by T
S Eliot and
Waiting for Godot, a play by Samuel Beckett
about impotence and despair, view of life as hopeless).
Prufrock and
Godot are both examples of modernist
texts where the romantic tragic hero is regarded as a myth. We
have the anti-hero or ordinary person on centre stage cut adrift
in a drama over which he or she has no control, aimless and
looking for direction and speculating about the meaning of it
all. Modernism is characterised by nostalgia for the certainty,
faith and authority of the past. Thus there is a tone of lament,
pessimism and despair.
- Find your own examples for both plays.
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead is modernist in
this sense but there are aspects of postmodernism, e.g. the
philosophising, speculating and agonising by Hamlet over grand
issues (such as meaning of life, death and religion) is treated
in Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead as farce through
the modes of satire, irony, burlesque and parody.
Stoppard's use of Hamlet is in some ways a postmodern
gesture. By appropriating such an iconic text as Hamlet
and presenting it from the perspective of peripheral characters
and then “playing” upon them for his own purposes,
Stoppard demonstrates that the human experience cannot be fully
understood by focusing on the dominant narrative.
The depiction of reality as a game or “spectacle”,
the destabilisation of identity and the inability of language to
offer security of meaning are further pointers to the postmodern
condition of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. They are indeed
bewildered innocents cast adrift in a disinterested and
dispassionate universe. The questioning and dismantling of the
individual authorial self conclusively marks the text as a
postmodern inquiry into how meaning is constructed.
- Find your own examples for both plays.
| Remember that the vital difference between modernism and
postmodernism is that the former laments fragmentation and the
latter celebrates it. So be cautious in referring to R&G as a
postmodern text. It is a modernist text that has some
postmodernist characteristics. The intense seriousness of the
modernists is diluted by the humour and parody of the
postmodernists. |

Language
Hamlet
The role of language in
Hamlet is to create meaning. It is
the utterance of the “paragon of animals”. It is a
sublime human achievement, and indeed Shakespeare's language
has been valued throughout the centuries as the pinnacle of
linguistic artistry. Language in
Hamlet expresses beauty,
truth and reason as well as being a tool of deception and
manipulation. It therefore has transcendent meaning which when
analysed will reveal “truth”. Traditional criticism,
based as it is on Liberal Humanist values, focuses on a universal
humanity which can be understood through a close analysis of
language and form.
In
Hamlet we find Shakespeare's full repertoire of
language skills: verse, prose, formal, colloquial, dialogue,
soliloquies, aside, puns, irony, parody, a range of imagery,
etc.
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead
Stoppard's language on the other hand expresses the ambiguous
nature of truth. There is no underlying fixed meaning in words.
The lack of control over their lives is mirrored in the
fragmentation of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern's language and
their persistent use of question.
The language games that Rosencrantz and Guildenstern's engage
in owes an intertextual debt to the influential 20
th
century philosopher, Ludwig Wittgenstein. Stoppard has
appropriated one of Wittgenstein's theories of language which
essentially states that language cannot express a universal
truth. Language resembles “moves” in a game and
outside of the game has no meaning whatsoever. This notion of
language having no transcendent value is another point of
difference between the two plays.
Stoppard also reveals his range of verbal artistry. His play is
rich in the playful use of cliché, black humour, irony,
puns, burlesque, cultural reference, etc. His use of colloquial
and clichéd language to state humankind's existential
dilemma serves to undermine the value traditionally attached to
Shakespeare's elevated poetry. The numinous authority of
Shakespeare's language is thus deflated.
Notwithstanding all this, we should never lose sight of the fact
that Stoppard is a playwright and his intention is to entertain
us. Stoppard's style, especially his humour, wit and comedic
timing, is the means by which the bleakness of Rosencrantz and
Guildenstern's (and by analogy our own) predicament is made
palatable through the medium of drama.
- Find examples and quotations from both Hamlet
and Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead.

Readings
The audience response to both texts is determined by values,
culture and context. Remember, the syllabus directs us to a
“study 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 should research the following critical approaches and
acquaint themselves with the theoretical principles underpinning
each of the approaches.
- Traditional Criticism which is based upon a Liberal
Humanist approach.
- Modern Criticism which is based upon a
Post-structuralist and New Historicist
approach.
The essential difference between the two approaches is that the
first tends to focus on character and the universality of
“the human condition” and the latter emphasises the
influence of context and the application of theory to the process
of reading.

Back to
Elective 1: Transformations