Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead

Does chance exist in the absurd, deterministic world of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead? Can you think of an example of chance within the play?

In Act I, Rosencrantz is introduced as lighthearted and simple while Guildenstern is introduced as serious and intellectual. How do they evolve as characters throughout the play? Are they complete foils of each other?

Why does Stoppard choose Hamlet as the source material for a satirical play that deals with theatricality, absurdity, free will, and mortality? Do these themes appear in the original play? If so, how? 

At the beginning of Act II, Hamlet tells Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, “I am but mad north north-west; when the wind is southerly I know a hawk from a handsaw” (49). What does this mean? Based on his actions throughout the play, would you categorize Hamlet as mad? Why or why not?

In an interview with Giles Gordon from 1968, Tom Stoppard confesses that he found inspiration for Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead in Samuel Becket’s Waiting for Godot. Stoppard says he primarily thought of “[Beckett’s] bent of humor” as he wrote his play; he never really saw Rosencrantz and Guildenstern as “two lost souls waiting for something to happen” like Beckett’s Vladimir and Estragon. Critics, however, disagree and argue that there are more similarities between these plays than just the “bent of humor”. Write an essay that compares Stoppard’s play to Beckett’s play.

How does the Player function throughout the text? What kind of character is he (round, static, symbolic, protagonist, antagonist, etc.)? Does his knowledge of his own fictionality and the play’s ending count as omniscience? Could he possibly be Shakespeare or some sort of god in the play’s universe?

Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are minor characters from Hamlet who become major characters as the protagonists in Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead. What happens to Hamlet in this move from Hamlet to Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead? Does he remain a major character or does he become a minor character?

At one point, the Player declares that actors on a stage do not exist unless they are being watched by an audience. What does an audience’s voyeurism symbolize? Given the symbolism, what are the implications of the characters’ fourth-wall-breaking? What kind of relationship do actors and the audience have?