Rosencrantz and Guildenstern (again)
Hi everyone. I didn't think my comments really had to do with the other R&G ones so I figured I might as well just start my own topic -- selfish I know...sorry.
One passage I found particularly interesting was in Act II when Guildenstern debates with the player about death. The player claims that the representation of death is more believable than death in actuality (and gives the example of hanging a man on stage). Guildenstern is unconvinced saying that the "fact of death has nothing to do with seeing it happen...It's just a man failing to reappear...an exit, unobstrusive and unannounced..."
I agree with both sides of the argument. On the one hand, the scary part about death is it is unknown, we can't experience it then come back to think about what we've experienced. On the other hand we need the representation of death to understand it is happenning (as in a play).
When Guil talks about death being an exit that no one really notices it reminded me of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern in Shakespeare's Hamlet. They are characters who are there one second, then they just sort of slip away. This is a good example of why death in a play must be a representation. We aren't moved by R&G's "unobtrusive exit" and therefore it feels less real than the dramatic deaths of all the other characters in the end. The realness of R&G's deaths are overshadowed by the dramatic representations of death. What is truest to life (and death) does not always work in a play.
So I was just wondering what everyone else thought about this-- is the representation of something more real than the reality of it? (e.g. love)-- or maybe the concept of playing roles which is prominent in the play, or anything else! So thanks for reading...
Kate P.
P.S. I saw Tom Stoppard on the streets of NYC a couple weeks ago. No, I didn't recognize him..my dad pointed him out. I felt cool.
One passage I found particularly interesting was in Act II when Guildenstern debates with the player about death. The player claims that the representation of death is more believable than death in actuality (and gives the example of hanging a man on stage). Guildenstern is unconvinced saying that the "fact of death has nothing to do with seeing it happen...It's just a man failing to reappear...an exit, unobstrusive and unannounced..."
I agree with both sides of the argument. On the one hand, the scary part about death is it is unknown, we can't experience it then come back to think about what we've experienced. On the other hand we need the representation of death to understand it is happenning (as in a play).
When Guil talks about death being an exit that no one really notices it reminded me of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern in Shakespeare's Hamlet. They are characters who are there one second, then they just sort of slip away. This is a good example of why death in a play must be a representation. We aren't moved by R&G's "unobtrusive exit" and therefore it feels less real than the dramatic deaths of all the other characters in the end. The realness of R&G's deaths are overshadowed by the dramatic representations of death. What is truest to life (and death) does not always work in a play.
So I was just wondering what everyone else thought about this-- is the representation of something more real than the reality of it? (e.g. love)-- or maybe the concept of playing roles which is prominent in the play, or anything else! So thanks for reading...
Kate P.
P.S. I saw Tom Stoppard on the streets of NYC a couple weeks ago. No, I didn't recognize him..my dad pointed him out. I felt cool.
posted by L Lazarow | 1:45 PM
3 Comments:
this si not appropriate for the blog, but
who else thought we have been talking about 'theatre of the OBSERVED'?!
b/c I definately did...........!? one day after school i researched for a half hour theatre of the observed... nothing came up so i just figured Mr. Lazarow made it up? i foudn out today in class what we really are learning about 'theatre of the absurd' and boy did i have a good laugh... and i read the packet about R&G and i still didn't catch on....
AHAHAH carolyn i'm glad i cleared that up for you.
-Kate
Something I saw that was really interesting...
In R&G, the two are comrads and share tolerance of each other.
This seems to be a contradiction "the Theatre of the Absurd" becuase this friendship seems to give them a place and a foundation from which to define themselves.
Just a thought.
Post a Comment
<< Home