"Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead", Tom Stoppard (1967)

Résumé du document

In this excerpt from 'Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead', the two minor characters turned protagonists are reunited with the player they encountered earlier and on whom they walked out as he and his companions were acting out a play form theme. There ensues a lament on the player's part, that might have been pathetic, were it not for the rather comical elements Stoppard has sneaked into it. Indeed, the play, despite its bleak title, (which is in itself rather paradoxical as Rosencrantz and Guildenstern do not die until the end of the play. It makes the reader feel that it is only a matter of pages before the two characters die.) is a witty comedy with a sort of absurd feel to it, yet still dealing with deeper issues, as can be seen in this passage in which Stoppard includes elements of reflection in the theatre and in life in general.

Extraits

[...] In this scene, for instance, they continue each-other's sentences rather than start a new one of their own (for example, Guil: he didn't talk sense, which he does.” Ros: “Which suggests the opposite.”) The fact that other people can not understand them when they are speaking together is reminiscent of twins that possess a language of their own in the first years of their lives. Moreover, the two often repeat the same sentence, or an approaching one, when one of them has spoken (for instance, Ros. just as Guil. just as mad.”). Also, finally, it seems they can understand each-other without even having to talk, as in: Guil. [...]

[...] We might draw a parallel between that statement and the players acting out their play for no one, with a sense of absurdity, just as humans live without witnesses, without a goal determined from above. In a sense, Guil.'s asking for a director is the same as humans wishing for a god to direct them (on a side note, we can state that Camus names the player as one of the absurd types of life, since he lives a new life every night during the play. [...]

[...] And Guil.'s cluelessness when we compare their claims on the character of royalty with what we are shown in Hamlet.) In this respect, it is also interesting to note how the word “classical” somehow evokes in Ros.'s mind the adjective which creates a collocative clash as this association of words does not seem quite natural, or to take notice of the zeugma “full of fine cadence and corpses”, and the association “love and rhetoric,” a rather strange thing to mention in correlation with Another example of wit appears in the corruption of traditional expressions, like “stark-raving or acts on assumptions.” A good part of the comical aspect of this passage is based on defamiliarization, for instance when Hamlet's famous soliloquies are referred to as him “talking to himself,” “which might be madness.” Stoppard denies his characters any claim to earnestness, as we can see in the player's speech: the first ternary rhythm, “first confidently, then hesitantly, then desperately,” the gradation one came forward. No one shouted at us. The silence was unbreakable . with the anaphora one . [...]

[...] Indeed, the play, despite its bleak title (which is in itself rather paradoxical as Rosencrantz and Guildenstern do not die until the end of the play. It reminds the reader that it is only a matter of pages before the two characters die.) is a witty comedy with a sort of absurd feel to it, yet still dealing with deeper issues, as can be seen in this passage in which Stoppard included elements of a reflection on theatre and on life in general. [...]

[...] II Beyond the comedy There is, indeed, much lightness in this excerpt, despite the subject, but other consideration also appear. Of course, the play is a irreverent, parodic rewriting of Shakespeare, with a major shift in perspective , as shown by the various references to Hamlet murderous for instance, corpse of unsullied Rosalinda” which can be seen as an inverted echo of the very much alive Gertrude in “incestuous sheets,” the play on words “with a vengeance” that reminds us that Hamlet is a revenge play, the player mentioning a play about king and a queen,” and in filigree of Ros.'s are the pleasures which we draw him on one might hear Hamlet's play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the King.” In the same vein, we can mention Ros's “Hamlet is not himself, outside or in. [...]