Although Tom Stoppard established his reputation with Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead when it was first produced in 1966, the playwright often appears reluctant to talk about his second play. Stoppard, who most critics report to be a very private person, repeatedly offers his interviewers only cryptic responses to their questions about the meaning of the piece. When asked whether or not Rosencrantz and Guildenstern embodies any particular philosophy, Stoppard replied that the play does not reveal any profound theories or metaphysical insights "on a conscious level, but one is a victim and beneficiary of one's subconscious all the time and, obviously, one is making choices all the time . It's difficult for me to endorse or discourage particular theories I personally think that anybody's set of ideas which grows out of the play has its own validity." Stoppard, like many renowned playwrights before him, seems almost to delight in adopting such an equivocal stance. As he tells Rodger Hudson, Catherine Itzin, and Simon Trussler--the editors of Theatre Quarterly-- in a frequently cited interview, "insofar as it's possible for me to look at my own work objectively at all, the element which I find most valuable is the one that oth
. . .
This short farce centers around the messengers's appointment with the English King who happens to be Lear. It had nothing to do with the condition of modern man or the decline of metaphysics. Their dependence on the script to give them directions and provide them with a purpose is similar to the six characters' plight in Pirandello's play. Lee makes reference to this passage and notes that Guil's final explanation "is statistically accurate, and presents us with a world of total unreliability--an amazing combination of phenomena simply cannot be made to yield either a sequence or a precedent. Normand Berlin called the play "derivative" and argued that Stoppard's obvious dependence on Shakespeare, Beckett and Pirandello causes the play to "think" too much which results in a lack of feeling "or [the] union of thought and emotion that we associate with Waiting for Godot and Hamlet. One metaphor, however, that has been neglected reveals Stoppard's skillful incorporation of mathematical theory in addition to Shakespearean rhetoric. One wasn't thinking, 'Life is an anteroom in which one has to kill time. As Guil suggests later in Act I, Stoppard introduces the mathematical theory of probability to help explain Ros and Guil's "absurd" predicament. After the eighty-ninth flip, Guil begins to ponder this seeming anomaly in an attempt to explain how such a phenomenon could occur. Facts remain isolated, refuse to form chains, and explanations remain forever 'possible,' the nature of circumstances determining the run being beyond our comprehension. While Stoppard was interested in this idea, he quickly abandoned it in favor of focusing on Rosencrantz and Guildenstern's situation at Elsinore. The Theatre of the Absurd, according to Esslin, refers to a body of dramatic work by post WW2 playwrights whose plays are all colored or patterned by an existentialist ideology. Based in large part upon the theories of Albert Camus and John Paul Sartre, existentialism addresses the feelings of "Absurdity" [the absence of purpose or meaning] humanity encounters in a world of shattered beliefs--a world where millions of people are killed in concentration camps and whole cities are annihilated by atomic bombs. Ros and Guil's reality (a condition Guil refers to as "thin the name we give to the common experience" in Act I) is not something which they can definitively establish but is continually altered as new information is provided by the playwright who controls their destiny.
Approximate Word count =
2013
Approximate Pages =
8 (250 words per page double spaced)
Simply subscribe to view this paper, and 100,000 others.
| CREDIT CARD |
ONLINE CHECK |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JOIN BY PHONE
|
|
|