from today's notes:
"...pulls them out of an ordered universe and sets them apart and alone in an empty world to fend for themselves. ..freedom to make choices, but very little stimulus and almost no will to do so...moved about by forces they cannot resist and do not understand. Their suffering is the product of loneliness, alienation, and incomprehension. Their dying is ... a disappearance ... a loss of substance. The protagonists' heroism takes the form of acceptance. He will in varying tones -- whining, complaining, questioning, criticizing, philosophizing -- protest his condition. But in the end ... the existential hero says, "So be it," and dropping protest submits. His quiet submission in the face of powerful forces that annihilate him gives him nobility and heroism ... leads [him] to bizarre and clownish performances ... a comic figure, very often a puppet or mechanical figure, whose gestures and bhavior he cannot control ... amusing ... all human beings are clowns and that the world is either an empty stage or an empty circus. The laughter is fraught with sadness..."
How does this existential view apply to the play?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
This existential view applies to the play because this is exactly Rosencrantz and Guildenstern in Stoppard's version of the play. When it talks about "pulling them out of a n ordered or even disordered universe and sets them apart and alone in an empty world to fend for themselves". I thought of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern were at the castle and didn't know their way around and you would see them wondering around. They were by themselves in a strange place to fend for themselves. Then when it says "they have the freedom to make choices, but very little stimulus and almost no will to do so". I think of the end when one of them says "there must have been some point when we could have said no". The king and queen are the forces that they are moved about by that they cannot resist and don't understand. "Their suffering is the product of lonliness, alienation, and incomprehension" i think of how they are so dependent on each other and being that way has caused them to suffer. The life in a box speech covers the protagonist's heroism and the different tones that are in the play. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern relize that they are going to die so they finally "submit". That is how I think the existential view applies to the play.
Good examples. I can see the poor guys wandering around the castle lost. It puts a different perspective on them.
This passage and its existential view applies to the play because it goes hand in hand with Rosencratz's and Guildenstern's lives. It says "pulls them out of an ordered universe and sets them apart and alone in an empty world to fend for themselves" meaning that nobody else was there to help the two. When they were in the woods, it was just the two of them and they had to figure out what to do by themselves. This was somewhat difficult for the two to do considering their constant bickering back and forth. Also as Taryn said, the wondering around in the castle. They had absolutely no clue what they were doing. They were quite amused with themselves. Then it says "freedom to make choices, but very little stimulus and almost no will to do so". This was extremely evident in the end when the two were talking about whether it would have made a differnce if they would have said "no" in the beginning. It implies that they believed in the idea that they had no control over there life and how it was going to end up. When it says "He will in varying tones -- whining, complaining, questioning, criticizing, philosophizing -- protest his condition", this is so true for the two. In the beginning when they find the coin they keep questioning why does it keep landing on heads? They also try to prove what the coin stands for and why they found. All of these logic sounding ideas are full of nonsense. Then it says "all human beings are clowns and that the world is either an empty stage or an empty circus", meaning that life must come to an end sometime. In the end of the play, the two finally realize this. They realize that life cannot continue forever and they they must die sometime and this must be that time.
Sadly, these two unfortunate souls are alone. From the moment they were summoned by the banging and the shouting of their names, they were shoved into this ridiculous role of solving madness when they are kind of mad themselves(or at least not completely sane).
They have made choices by themselves; as a matter of fact, they have found the reason for Hamlet's act of madness. They are the pawns of the king and throughout the entire play they are ignorant. Because they are alone, they suffer a great deal of apprehension and misunderstandings. Afterall, what is the first thing they can recall? The summons. The jolt out of their normal life, whatever that may have involved, and into a world of unusual actors who perform acts of the future and portray either sex quite well.
The play seemed unrealistic, like it really was just being acted out and the deaths of R. and G. were just pleasant disappearances, a fading act, a trick of the eye. So much more acceptable to the gut than a hanging. Rosencratz mentions that he's ready for death, to see if it really is pleasant afterwards. Guildenstern complains to the main actor about how death may not be so kind and questions if he could have possibly said no to the summons in the beginning, or perhaps no to life. Either way, they submit and get some credit for heroism.
The physics demonstrations are definitely bizarre and clownish. Rosencratz even juggles like a clown. Their ignorance but sparks of high intelligence make their dialogue comical. The light jokes about serious topics make the play easy to relate to and very amusing.
The world being an empty stage creeps me out. I don't like to think of myself as a clown in an empty circus. Like the players, I need and audience.
As to the last sentence, I laughed and I cried.(end script here)
Exuent Delver
The second sentence where it describes the actors being put into another world describes Rosencrantz and Guildenstern because they are not even clear in the beginning why they are traveling to Denmark, and they have no one that they can rely on for help except each other. They obviously had choices to choose from, and they just accepted whatever was offered to them. They could have said no at the beginning, but they had no will to. They're like the yes-man that eventually is done in by trying to please others and for accepting everything. Repeating a line in the existentialist view, the hero gives in to the "inevitable doom." The speech by Rosencrantz about life in a box is an example of the time before they accepted death even though they might not conscientiously know that they will die. Right before they were hanged shows how they accepted death because of Rosecrantz speech about how death might not be that bad. The last line in the first paragraph reflects how I see Rosencrantz and Guildenstern as heroes through the movie. I had at first believed that they were greedy, but the movie presented how they were just puppets in the play that just give in to a death caused by random reasons. Instead of being glad that they died, I'm depressed that they were sacrificed because they did not say no that one time.
From analyzing this passage today in class, it is easy to make the connections of the existential view with Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. The opening scene of the play when they are traveling and their experiences throughout the castle show how they both are alone in an "empty world", an "ordered or even disordered universe" where they have to fend for themselves. Again, like Taryn stated before, they depended so much on each other which was the cause of their suffering because they were never able to broaden their horizons. Moreover, Guildenstern in the closing scene wonders whether their situation would've been different if they would've said no earlier, which shows how "they have the freedom to make choices . . . little stimulus .. no will." This leads to their final submission to accepting their death and "inevitable doom . . . a state of suspended anticipation, or to be absorbed into emptiness without leaving a trace . . . the existential hero says, 'So be it,' and submits." This goes hand-in-hand with their fate, and the existential view that one cannot control their own. Even though Rosencrantz and Guildenstern can make their own decisions, "Their dying is not the result of actions by themselves." I disagree with Cameron that they finally realized the process that life must come to an end. Realizing something means that you understand it, almost as an epiphany. I believe that they both accepted death, but never quite understood it. For example, throughout the play they would make these in-depth philosophical speeches about life and fate, such as "Life in a box," but even though there was thought behind their meaning it was mostly nonsense. They always had questions and no answers. Lastly, "The suprise and wonder in response to the incomprehensible events . . . lead to bizarre and clownish performances." This is definitely shown throughout the play with Rosencrantz and Guildenstern's scientific discoveries, witty remarks and play on words. I like how Colleen put it as, "Their ignorance but sparks of high intelligence make their dialogue comical." I can't put it better myself.
Are you sure that this is a definition of Existentialism? Or is it a definition of the play Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead ? Because I seriously can’t tell a difference! Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are the prime example of the existential characters that I form in my head while reading this definition. I know, Stoppard must have had this very paper right beside him when he formed Rosencrantz and Guildenstern to fit each aspect.
Like the definition says, the duo had every chance in the world to make their own decisions, but rather choose to be ignorant and resistant to being informed. For example as they roamed the castle and saw bits and pieces of the dramatic scenes that were taking place, they didn’t try to put two and two together to understand the story in its entirety. Instead they scrambled around from order to order half doing their job (as friend, as comforter, as messenger) and remained unaware of their surroundings. I feel that they take no responsibility in deciding anything for their own lives because they don’t realize what a privilege it is to make decisions until they are introduced to the idea that maybe their “fate” was decided for them already. Not until they are at the gallows do we see Guildenstern even explore the idea that maybe there was a time when he could have said no/ done something to better his own future.
Other than that we see Rosencrantz and Guildenstern question (Rosencrantz…a lot!) and philosophize (is that how you spell it?) just as the definition suggests. Every two seconds it seems there was some future discovery coming by way of Rosencrantz! In the end though, we see them both submit to death because they have either given into the idea that this was decided for them and they really have no choice, or they just think it is too late for them to have a say in their own lives. They give up gracefully and don’t make a big fuss. It seems their lives where just a thing to them; not important or unimportant.
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern never really realize, until it’s too late, the severity of the situation they are in. This leads to their downfall yes, but it is also what makes them so humorous. The fact that they are acting so completely different than the way we, as an audience, think they should act makes them hilarious to watch. They are in such a stink and they are just floating around like the biggest problem they have is that Rosencrantz repeats Guildenstern way too much. It’s just so far away from how we perceive they would be acting if they knew the same story that we did which makes it a real knee slapper. We laugh, but we know it’s not going to end up well at all. It’s definitely twisted laughter which again is a first class existentialism trait.
Due to events beyond their comprehension, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern have been requested to ride to Denmark in order to discover the suffering of lord Hamlet. Being the existential heros they are, they do not question anyone and simply ride on to a miserable fate. At no point do they receive aid in finding their way around. They rely on one another for guidance, which eventually proves inadequate. At many points i felt the castle was abandoned. It seemed like, other than the two protagonists, there was no one around. These times were when the did the majority of their conversing in order to figure out what to do about their situation with Hamlet.
They did spend much time worrying and bickering over their situation. It was apparent that they had no clue they were in line for death, despite the obvious clues throught the story. Although i feel they could have stopped and said "no" at many times, i remember that death is the least of your worries as a youth. They suffer because of events far beyond their power. I felt it was more fate than anything that decided their life for them. Towards the end the two began to do everything in their power to escape their death, but eventually realized how inevitable it is for us all. After this epiphany they became calm and approached death with defiance. This turned them into repectable men, and really gave me a since of respect for the two. The existential view is apparent in so many aspects of this story. It's very obvious that these two were existential heros from the very beginning.
Existentialism is a very interesting view on life and can easily be seen through the two main characters of “Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead“. Tom Stoppard obviously was aware of the similarities between existentialist heroes and his two protagonists.
The entire portion of the excerpt which starts at "The protagonists' heroism takes a form of acceptance," and ends at "...dropping protest submits,", can easily relate to the end of the story. In the scene directly before they are hung, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are talking about their lives and whether or not they have done anything bad. Immediately after this discussion ends Rosencrantz says, "All right then. I don't care. I've had enough." They eventually realize that “life in a box” is a reality to everyone and they too must one day submit to life’s demands.
“They have the freedom to make choices, but very little stimulus and almost no will to do so,” directly correlates with the part above. For after the submission, Guildenstern makes the comment that “At the beginning [they] could have said no”. I love the idea that the two realize that they have become blinded by royalty into missing what they have been sucked into.
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are each others only company. They have trouble knowing how to act around others, and even each others sometimes. The two are normally alienated from the crowd for one reasons or another. This ties in with another common existentialism value, “Their sugaring is the product of loneliness, alienation, and incomprehension.” The pair don’t even realize that they are on their own until they are aboard the ship to England.
Finally, the portion of “The Effect of the Existential View” which states “He becomes a comic figure, very often a puppet or mechanical figure, whose gestures and behavior he cannot control”. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern rely heavily on one another, especially the character of Rosencrantz who can sometimes simply copy what Guildenstern says or does. True the two are very witty, but sometimes they can’t even tell which way is North (literally!). By using the word “puppets” to describe the heroes it only had fuel to the fire that life is scripted into a very well written and entertaining play.
I think it is very easy to tell that Tom Stoppard wrote the characters to reflect many existential values and ideas. Many of the actions the pair make, and many of the dialogue they are presented with is a mirror image of the definition we are given with existentialism. It is a very philosophical idea to ponder over.
-Devin Duncan
This existential view is acted out by Rosencrantz and Guildenstern at almost every point of the play. They seem for the most part to be alone throughout the play. At certain times, other people like Hamlet and the players make an appearance, but that is only a fraction of the entire play. One would think that in a large castle like the play is set in there would be many servants bustling around, just doing routine house (castle) work, but no, two guys are allowed to roam the halls without interference of any kind. The forces they cannot resist seem to be the king and queen. In scenes where they show up, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are pushed around and led wherever the king and his posse are heading and they have no control. They just go with what they are being led to, whether that ends up good or bad. The "whining, complaining, questioning, criticizing, philosophizing" element is evident in the "life in a box" speech Rosencrantz gives on the tomb. He questions the meaning and purpose of life. What I feel fits the best with the play though is the idea that "all human beings are clowns and that the world is either an empty stage or an empty circus." Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are very humorous and clever, whether it is with just each other or with Hamlet. But in the end it is all for nothing because it ends in their death. The closing of the caravan at the end really gives this quote a visual reference because there is no one else around, so it seems as if no one is watching. The acceptance comes in the form of their acceptance of death on the ship. I know if I had a noose around my neck I would be no where near as calm and collected as Rosencrantz and Guildenstern were. They accepted their fate and did not question what they had done, just whether or not it was truly necessary.
This existential perspective is like the long lost identical twin of Stoppard's play. In the passage it says, "...moved about by forces they cannot resist and do not understand" I think this line could represent Rosencrantz and Guildenstern agreeing come to the palace. Really it could represent every decision they made, because everything that was asked of them they generally agreed to. The two lines that read, "Their dying is...a disappearance...a loss of substance. The protagonists' heroism takes the form of acceptance." makes me think of right before Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are hanged and Rosencrantz basically says I don't care about death, I'm relieved to know that I'm doing to die. Rosencrantz accepts the fact that he's going to die and really doesn't seem to upset about it. Almost ALL of the characteristics that the passage touches on relates back to Rosencrantz and Guildenstern.
- Elizabeth Roberts
This is almost perfectly related to the play Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are dead. Almost each and every point connects to the play. As soon as we meet Rosencrantz and Guildenstern it is like they have really been pulled out of a different universe because they have absolutely no idea where they are going or why they are going there. They are completely out of it for the entire duration of the play. The forces that move them are the ones that they are unfamiliar with, like the order of the king. Ultimately, they are both content with whatever happens and they just brush it off by saying "So be it." The final lines which read "all human beings are clowns and that the world is either an empty stage or an empty circus. The laughter is fraught with sadness" ring true. These phases are overflowing with meaning and correlate with the play perfectly. Its existentialism is very obvious.
Post a Comment