Comparing Tom Stoppard's Rosencrantz And Guildenstern Are Dead

Written as an extension to the play Hamlet, Tom Stoppard’s Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead focus not on the titular character of Shakespeare’s play, but on Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, two somewhat minor characters in Hamlet. The play follows the two of them after the King of Denmark enlists them to find out what afflicts their friend, Hamlet. It is written from the perspective of the backstage happenings, parts of the Hamlet readers would not read about. Stoppard scatters elements of “healthy confusion” in the play through the use of questions, suspense, and misnomers to create a sense of "pleasure and disquietude" in the readers. One major feeling experienced while reading Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead is suspense. Suspense

In either case, Guildenstern doesn’t truly have a choice because his fate, either winning or losing, has been determined for him by Rosencrantz. The question of choice versus fate extends into every interaction Rosencrantz and Guildenstern have in the play, and the inclusion of both causes confusion. In the play, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern arbitrarily seem to have moments of fate and moments of choice. Both, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, shows moments of extreme determination and passivity. When they are determined, they question their existence and why they were summoned. One of them gets impassioned to make decisions about their plans. However, most of the time, they are very “indifferent” (23) and “have no desires” (17). Both of them make several references to how they are “entitled to some direction” and would rather someone make decisions for them. They doubt themselves and whether or not they honestly have a choice (43). Rosencrantz is even shown to understand Hamlet’s plight during the play, but never make any actions based on that understanding. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are false existentialists. They mention the importance of adding meaning to one’s life and making one’s