Welcome to the very first post!
It's hard to know where to begin? Do we start with the best lines from Hamlet? - "not where he eats but where he is eaten"? or "ay, there's the rub, / For in that sleep of death what dreams may come / when we have shuffled off that mortal coil must give us pause" or "The play's the thing / Wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king" or "Tho this be madness / Yet there is method in it"? We could go on and on and on, but we've learned from Polonius that "brevity is the soul of wit," so we'll cease here.
Perhaps we should start with our new friends Rosencrantz and Guildenstern (or is it Guildenstern and Rosencrantz?) who find themselves in a delicate position "fit for a king's remembrance." Does the word "remembrance" make you a little uneasy? This is a tragedy after all. But then "Life in a box is better than no life at all" so they say.
So what do you think of Stoppard's version of the play? Absurd? Existential? Tragicomedy? Just downright weird?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
The word remembrance does make me a little uneasy. It makes me think that Guildenstern and Rosencratz know that they are gong to die. They realize that they are going to die and that they must be remember very well by the king. In order to do this they do whatever is necessary to please him and in some cases suck up to him. Then the quote "life in a box is better than no life at all" I completely disagree with. I believe that we have the right to make our own choices and that it is not in our script of life. What is the point in living if everything is already planned out for you and pre-destined? There isn't any point in life if this is true. We have the capability to make are own decisions in life and must do so. I believe that Stoppard's version of the play is very hilarious. Rosencratz and Guildenstern are two characters who just act like they have no clue about everything they are doing and bring humor to whatever they are doing. I believe this version is just downright wierd especially because the players acted out a scene in Hamlet before it even happened. This in itself just put a twist to this version and put some wonder in the minds of the audience.
Oh bother, this movie just brings up the whole pre-destination forum again doesn't it? Well for that I think it all depends on what pre-destination means to each individual. Now I don't know if what I believe falls under such category or not and I don't know if it matters all that much, but here it is. My uncle presented this idea and it makes the most sense to me, so I adopted it. My uncle was a manager over a group of guys at his work and he had been for many years. He said that everyday he would ask them what they wanted for lunch from one certain restaurant, but because he knew them so well he knew what they would choose. He says he could have ordered for them, but even still he gave them the free will to decide. If they just so happened to change their minds they could but most of the time they didn't. In the same way, I think that God provides us with options, but because He knows us so well He knows what we are going to choose before we actually do. Again, not because He forced us, but because He knows us so deeply. Therefore, I think we still have choice, but at the same time we have a certain plan ahead of and just for us...hope that made sense to someone other than myself (?)
Anyway, to address the remembrance bit, yes it does make me a little uneasy. I'm not all that sure why. Maybe it is because remembrance seems way more dedicated and permanent than just remembering something. I remember things all the time, but I’m not sure how many of those things have passed into my "remembrance". The word just seems a little too hard core, like it's something that you could never forget even if you wanted to. (Insert creepy Halloween music).
I think this version was a mix of all things listed. However I am leaning towards agreeing with Cameron on the mainly downright weird side. That's not to say i don't enjoy downright weird, it was just still...well...weird (strange if you're feeling like you need a synonym). Again agreeing with Cameron the players = straight up woah. I wouldn't want to run into a band of that troupe. No thank you, I’ll pass. They were just creepy and also the whole butt thing was a major turn off. I'm just sayin'.
Remembrance is actually a pleasant word for me because a person is remembering something important to them. It makes me more sad than uneasy. I view the life in a box in two ways. It could be that the box is protecting a person, therefore making the person ignorant. The box could be taken literally, which means that the person is going to die of suffocation painfully and is restricted in movement. The play is really humorous, and it makes me really wish that Rosencrantz and Guildenstern hadn't died. This is different from my opinion while reading the book because I thought they deserved to die for being so selfish. The play changed it because they didn't completely know what was going on, which made me feel sorry for them. I like the play because it's a different angle at things and makes me better understand what could have happened and how everything is interconnected in life. I also like it because I could "delve" into the play or not, so that I could watch the play in any moods that I was in. Even though some parts were strange, it's like the line in Hamlet "Tho this be madness / Yet there is method in it." My journal entry on the whole script of life explains how I feel about the subject. Just quickly, it's that whoever wrote the script had to have thought it up, so it's chance that a person got a script to say yes in a situation where a different person got a script so say no to the same situation. Finally (possibly), the extra credit you said we could do if we find the play that the quote on the blog is from. The answer is The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam. I would underline it or italicize it if I could. One extra thing, if you know how to use Veohtv very well, you can download the video from there. Just type Rosencrantz and Guildenstern.
The best lines from Hamlet, as you listed, are amazingly thought-provoking. I mean who goes around prophesying about how even the richest humans end up where the poorest do, and how the poor may even eat the rich. It's all kind of euphoric.
"Remembrance" suggests that there is something worth remembering and cannot be thought of unless thinking of the past. Obviously this foreshadows Rosencratz' and Guildenstern's death. The tragic story of untimely deaths is what will be remembered by kings (the heir Fortinbras).
Life in a box may be better than not having a life, but then what is life in a box at all? It is surely not a life worth living. Therefore, I may as well choose death because a life lived closed off from other lives is not living, it's simply existing. O' the beauty of open minds and a plethora of connotative words to entertain them.
I have to admit that I was partly turned off at the beginning of the play. "Heads, heads, heads, heads..." isn't exactly my idea of good dialogue. It was absolutely absurd and extremely existential. The whole play was a play on words within a play with a play on words. Perhaps the reason it bothered me was because it does make me question the "it is written" fate. Unquestionably, this play was weird but very understandable. How is that possible? I'm still asking myself that.
The word "remembrance" makes me feel uneasy because it isn't something that is set. It is like taking someone's word for something, instead of writing it down or making a contract. This meaning symbolizes for Rosencrantz and Guildenstern that their reward may not be as tangible as they would like to think. It also gives the sense of a dreamlike state, and nothing is certain for them. Moreover, I loved Stoppard's version of the play. There were some changes between the two, but for the most part they were pretty parallel in their details. For example, Polonius didn't yell behind the curtain to yell help for the Queen, but instead Stoppard interpreted it as Rosencrantz and Guildenstern as sneaking up behind him and scaring him; which caused him to make a sound, thus Hamlet killing him. I think the best part about this version of the play was its absurdity. Having that element of extreme enigma and randomness makes the whole play much more amusing and funny. I also liked how Stoppard incorporated all of the philosophical speeches in each scene because it really made you think and ponder on the things they were saying, which was even more ironic because they were delving into such deep topics in a very absurd way. You can definitely call this play a tragicomedy because Rosencrantz and Guildenstern were hilarious throughout the whole play, yet they ended up dying at the end, which is kinda of sad(in a funny way). I didn't think this movie was weird at all, a bit odd, but not weird. It was easier to follow the mindset and relate to the characters as the play went on. Again, I really enjoyed watching Stoppard's play, and it made me feel almost sympathetic for Rosencrantz and Guildenstern from this point of view because they just got caught up in everything and were ignorant to what was going on in the first place.
The word remembrance makes me feel a bit uneasy, because when I hear it I think of death or dedication. Which is ironic considering that Rosencrantz and Guildenstern die. They do die with the remembrance of the king because they were doing something for him when they died. Now for the quote "life in a box is better than no life at all". I don't agree with at all. I believe that we all have a plan in store for us, but that we can make choices that will affect our plan. For example, I think there was plenty of times where Rosencrantz and Guildenstern could have chose not to do something for the king because it would hurt their friend, but they wanted to get on the good side of the king. The half of Stoppard's version that I saw I really enjoyed. I liked it better than the play, but I think that if you hadn't read the play that you would get easily confused, because the players did a scence in the movie that hadn't even happend yet. I think there was a lot of forshadowing in the movie. I thought that Stoppard's version was funny and weird. it was weird that they did stuff before it happend. It was also strange that the main player man could just pop in and out wherever he wanted to. All in all I liked the play and the movie just the movie was a little weird or creppy may be a better word to describe it.
I think when they talk of a man's "remembrance" it has a foreshadowing effect. When I hear remembrance I don't think of a reward, I think of someone being gone and people remembering them. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern don't seem to sense any type of threat in the word though, because they watched the play of their death without actually realizing what was going on. I believe though, that the life in a box idea is kind of disturbing. No one wants to live a life in which they are completely sheltered and they do not get to live and learn through their personal choices (good or bad). To me that is not really a life, it is more or less just an existence. This play was a little crazy, but I liked it. One thing that kind of bothered me was that when just Rosencrantz and Guildenstern were talking, the language was fairly easy to understand, if you could keep up with the wit, but as soon as a scene from Hamlet was inserted it got to be a little hard to follow. I LOVED the questions game. The end did confuse me a little though. It was pretty out there and came as a surprise. I didn't imagine Rosencrantz and Guildenstern being killed on the ship, and that threw me off a little. Overall, I really enjoyed Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead. It was unlike anything I have ever seen before.
I felt the word remembrance brought a rather positive tone to an unhappy ending. It made me feel that they serve a purpose deeper than that of an antagonist. Although they die in a tragic way, causes by simply "dumb luck," they are still the main characters and still play a very significant role. I felt this play gave Rosencrantz and Guildenstern a much more amusing and light-hearted personality than the original. They are much more likeable in this revised edition, simply because they do discover things by accident and at no point have bad intentions. I really came to like them and was disappointed when they were unable to escape their unevitable death. Even in death the two found humor. I really enjoyed the revision to this play. The murder of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern by the players really made me feel that they didn't die, but were simply acting in the play. Once again a rhetorical question is being raised. Although the ending is left for interpretation, i felt they did die. It was death but i felt it was simply inevitable.
The word remembrance is a more somber word in my opinion. When I think of the word remembrance I make a direct connection to memories. Those memories normally consist of people that I was close to that have either died, or are no longer in my life for one reason or another. When relating the word remembrance to the play I will agree that because of Rosencratz and Guildenstern's situation I find myself feeling a little uneasy. When pondering the quote "Life in a box is better than no life at all" I have to say that I do not agree with it at all. When reading that quote I feel the speaker is saying, "I'm settling for things on this level when I know I could have things on a much higher level. But what I do have is better than having nothing at all". People fear the "what if's" too much. What if I fail while attempting something more? What if there's someone better than me? Well those are very normal questions and fears to have, but there's a certain point where you have to just dive in, head first. No one should settle for mediocre; if you think you can go farther, or do better then TRY and after awhile it'll start paying off! As far as the whole pre-destined fate goes, I do feel that God has a general plan/direction that your life will follow, but I don't think that absolutely EVERY little detail is planned out for us. I mean we have brains for a reason right? To think and make our on decisions. In the movie I truely believe that Rosencrantz and Guildenstern could've changed their situation for the better. If Rosencrantz and Guildenstern would've been real friends they would've been straight forward with Hamlet and shown him the letter once they read it. Then the three of them could've come up with a plan to avoid Hamlet's death. The King of England didn't even know they were coming, therefore they could've docked in England and all gotten off the ship and runaway to another country and never even bothered to see the king. And then they ALL would be alive. See, they totally could've changed the situation around. It's examples like that that make me feel like sometimes our fate is in our control. I thought Stoppard's verison was brillant and extremely funny! Rosencrantz and Guildenstern were so confused by each other that it just cracked me up. I really enjoyed watching it!
This existentail view appleis to the play by desribing the unfortunate effents of two characters. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are those two unfortunate characters. "Moved about by forces they cannot resist and do not understand" describes how both, Rosencrants and Guildenstern, were summond to see the king. They came but did not know why. When they found out that something was wrong with Hamlet they were conflicted on doing thier duties to there king and Hamlet. They has a freedom of choice but little "stimulus" to make them. The qoute, "Their dying is ... a disappearance ... a loss of substance," reminds me of how at the end Rosencrantz really does not care if he dies. It is like he gives up. That is my views on how that existensial view reflect the play.
First of all, I’d like to say that this play is without a doubt the best and funniest play I've ever seen in any of my previous English classes... thank you.
When I first hear the phrase "fit for a king's remembrance" it didn't strike me at all. But now that we have finished reading the play, it is really, really ironic! Shakespeare's word choice in that particular line is so good that I think it must have been impossible for him to have done it by accident. He definitely meant to include that little bit of ironic foreshadowing in there.
I am completely stunned by how funny Stoppard was able to create this play while staying faithful to the original plot and text of Hamlet. I wouldn't consider him anything short of a genius based on the amazing play writing skills he revealed in Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead. Tragicomedies are officially my favorite genres.
Post a Comment