Tom Stoppard’s transformation of Hamlet, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead both
reinforces and undermines responses to Hamlet in terms of the responders relationship
with the text and understanding. William Shakespeare’s Hamlet is a text heavily
grounded in the context of Elizabethan England and theatre, humanism and the
conventions of revenge tragedy. Stoppard has transformed the canonical weight of
Hamlet to a text that appeals to contemporary situations and audiences, resulting in the
‘postmodern pastiche’ Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead. Stoppard’s play is also
greatly reflective of the dominant contextual forces in play at the time of its publication:
existentialism, Theatre of the Absurd and a disillusioned world view characteristic of the
Cold War era. Stoppard’s transformation of themes, characters, structure, form and
meaning has both reinforced responses to Hamlet in terms of understanding and the
insights gained from the play, yet has simultaneously undermined responses to Hamlet in
regards to the responders relationship with the text and characters. “The transformation
produces a new text that both reinforces and undermines responses to the old text”
Stoppard reinforces our understanding of Shakespeare’s exploration of the theme
illusion versus reality by shedding light on this concept in a different way as a result of
his different context. In Hamlet the illusion of the ghost as characteristic of the revenge
tragedy convention intervention of the supernatural acts as a theatrical device, creating
conflict and forcing Hamlet to question his humanist beliefs as to how one gains
knowledge. “I the son of a dear father murdered…Must, like a whore, unpack my heart
with words”. It acts as a catalyst for the actions of the play which is dominated by the
notion of ‘seeming’: “seems, nay, I know not seems”. Shakespeare plays on illusion,
giving it equal weighting to the forces of reality. Hamlet is “but mad north north west”,
yet in reality his is a “crafty madness”. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern appear to be
Hamlet’s friends but in reality are “sponges…soaking up the Kings countenance”.
Stoppard has transformed Shakespeare’s exploration of illusion versus reality to examine
the notion of truth from a postmodern perspective, shedding light on the concept of truth
as fluid, subjective and relative. Postmodernism gained force following the Second
World War and was particularly of influence during the social, political and philosophical
revolutions of the 1960’s at which time Stoppard’s play was published. Stoppard’s use of
metatheatrical language, structure and form, a postmodernist influence as a result of
Stoppard’s modern context, remind us that the play is not a reality, but rather a created
artifice; an illusion.
Guil: We don’t know how the act
Player: Act Natural, You know why you’re here at least
Guil: We only know what we’re told. And for all we know that isn’t even true
Player: For all anyone knows nothing is. Everything has to be taken on trust: truth is
only that which is taken to be true.
The self-conscious language of Stoppard’s transformation acknowledges the stage and
the audience, blurring the boundaries of illusion and reality and providing further insight
into Shakespeare’s initial consideration of the theme by positioning the audience to
consider the ideas raised, rather than surrender themselves to the drama. Stoppard’s
transformation of Shakespeare’s exploration of illusion versus reality reinforces the
responders understanding of the theme by providing rich insights in a modern situation,
enabling the audience to relate to and understand the ideas raised by both Shakespeare
and Stoppard.
Stoppard’s reconsideration of Shakespeare’s exploration of death in Hamlet
reinforces responses to Hamlet by shedding light on this theme from a different angle. In
Elizabethan England death was glorious, heroic, violent, triumphant and noble. The glory
of death was reserved for monarchies however, as Shakespeare’s audience was interested
in lives far removed from their own. Stoppard has transformed Shakespeare’s glorious
consideration of death and due to his different context has shed new light on this timeless
theme, reinforcing responses to Hamlet through a redeveloped understanding of death as
a natural force. For Ros and Guil death is inevitable: it looms in the title and in our
knowledge of Shakespeare’s tale (Paul McDonald). In Stoppard’s play death is not
glorious or heroic, rather, it is “the absence of presence, nothing more”. “Dying is not
romantic, and death is not a game which will soon be over…Death is not anything…a
gap you can’t see, and when the wind blows through it, it makes no sound”. Death as a
continuation of a meaningless existence is an existential concept that pervaded Western
society following the Second World War. The tragedies of the Holocaust and Stalin’s
purges and the wake of Hiroshima desensitized society to not only the meaning of life,
but also the significance of death. Life is preceded by nothingness and must end in
nothingness. Stoppard’s transformation reinforces Shakespeare’s initial consideration of
death by shedding light from a modern angle and therefore positioning the responder to
reconsider Shakespeare’s exploration.
Stoppard’s transformation undermines the responder’s relationship with the
characters of the text by repositioning the audience. In Hamlet, Hamlet is the protagonist:
a worthy hero who is isolated and vulnerable. He is the center of the universe, dictated by
the chain of being, a metaphor for the order, unity and completeness of the created world.
Reflecting the context of Elizabethan theatre, the audience feels an intimacy with the
epitome of the Canon, compounded by Shakespeare’s use of language in allowing
Hamlet to literally be the center of the play with his soliloquies. However, in Stoppard’s
play the tide is turned and Hamlet is a lost madman. In Stoppard’s transformation of
language Hamlet is denied his soliloquies,
reflecting Stoppard’s context in which society was more concerned with the ‘everyman’
and those characters they could relate to. As an audience we no longer feel empathy for
Hamlet but rather are angered by his treatment of Ros and Guil. This is reflected in
Stoppard’s transformation of structure-he manipulates the scenes so that Hamlet is denied
a word of sense. Stoppard’s transformation undermines the audience’s response to
Hamlet, as we no longer feel empathy for his situation but rather apathy and indifference.
Stoppard’s transformation undermines Shakespeare’s portrayal of Rosencrantz
and Guildenstern as malicious henchmen. Stoppard’s transformation suggests that Ros
and Guil are bewildered innocents striving for reality in a world of illusion, caught up in
forces larger than themselves. In Stoppard’s transformation of form, two minor characters
have been given major roles reflecting a shift in society’s concerns from the great to the
‘everyman’. They are now symbols for humanity, an extension of the audience, trying to
comprehend their seemingly meaningless existence, a reflection of Stoppard’s context
and the dominance of existentialism. In Hamlet they have a profound lack of identity.
Stoppard has transformed this element of Shakespeare’s play so that Ros and Guil are
now virtually indistinguishable, a reflection of Theatre of the Absurd which was
characterized by lack of character development. They continue to lack identity yet for
different reasons, undermining Shakespeare’s portrayal of Ros and Guil as malicious
henchmen. Stoppard’s transformation of language so that Ros and Guil speak modernly
although they are Elizabethan characters increases the connection with Ros and Guil by
the fact that they are characters that quite literally speak our language. Stoppard’s
transformation of Ros and Guil to characters we now feel empathy for and can relate to
undermines Shakespeare’s portray of the duo as vindictive, calculating and superficial.
“The transformation produces a new text that both reinforces and undermines responses
to the old text”. William Shakespeare’s Hamlet is a text heavily grounded in the context
of Elizabethan England and theatre, humanism and the conventions of revenge tragedy.
Stoppard has transformed the canonical weight of Hamlet to a text that appeals to
contemporary situations and audiences, resulting in the ‘postmodern pastiche’
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead. Stoppard’s play is also greatly reflective of the
dominant contextual forces in play at the time of its publication: existentialism, Theatre
of the Absurd and a disillusioned world view characteristic of the Cold War era where
mankind’s new found ability to destroy itself challenged many of societal ideals
regarding the inherent goodness of humankind and life. Stoppard’s transformation of
themes, characters, structure, form and meaning has both reinforced responses to Hamlet
in terms of understanding and the insights gained from the play, yet paradoxically has
simultaneously undermined responses to Hamlet in regards to the responders relationship
with the text and characters.