Stoppard And Beckett Comparison Essay, Research Paper
Normally an writer wouldn & # 8217 ; Ts say whether or non they have been straight influenced by another writer or dramatist. When you really read their work nevertheless, it becomes clear that some writers portion common positions on certain topics or look up to another writer or dramatist so much that their ain manner begins to straight reflect the work of another. I believe this is the same connexion shared by the modern playwrights and absurdist authors Tom Stoppard and Samuel Beckett. The connexion between these two writers is clearly shown through the survey of Waiting for Godot and Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead.
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, from Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead, are really similar to Beckett & # 8217 ; s characters Vladimir and Estragon. Their beliefs and behavior clearly show this. Stoppard & # 8217 ; s characters parallel Beckett & # 8217 ; s by inheriting their failing memory, baffled individuality, uncertainness, deficiency of determination devising accomplishments, and even the usage of verbal game playing to go through clip. Like Vladimir and Estragon, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern seem to be unsure of their ain individuality and particularly their ain fate.
Both sets of characters are invariably seeking for replies. In Waiting for Godot, Didi and Gogo are waiting with changeless defeat and uncertainness for possible replies to life & # 8217 ; s inquiries. They feel that Godot may keep the replies. They reasonably much can & # 8217 ; t, and wear & # 8217 ; T, make determinations for themselves ; alternatively they & # 8217 ; d instead delay and see what Godot would make. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are seeking to understand the significance of the events which they find out are really transporting them to their ain deceases. They exist in an ambiance of uncertainness and confusion. They & # 8217 ; re basically two characters lost in their ain drama. In a manner they are really waiting for Hamlet. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern besides have trouble in doing determinations for themselves. They are basically the male monarchs pawns, making everything he says. This becomes clear when they don & # 8217 ; t even prevent they & # 8217 ; re ain deceases. Alternatively of trying to alter their destiny, they merely go with the flow. They go on to England and seek and follow their original program ; which finally leads to their deceases.
Both sets of characters want or wanted to experience an importance in life. Early in Waiting for Godot, Vladimir points out to Estragon that they should hold been the first to leap off the Eiffel Tower. This shows how nonmeaningful they find life to be in that they would hold really found significance in killing themselves. Its as if they would & # 8217 ; ve felt a sense of achievement if they & # 8217 ; vitamin Ds have jumped off of the Eiffel Tower because they would hold been the first to make it. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern besides want to experience of import. After happening out that they were intended to be put to decease in England, Rosencrantz says, & # 8220 ; Who & # 8217 ; vitamin D of idea that we were so of import? & # 8221 ; Throughout the whole drama they were seeking to experience utile by assisting the King and following his demands, but in the terminal they feel of import because their deceases were being plotted the whole clip. In the terminal they & # 8217 ; re non worried about their deceases, merely like Estragon and Vladimir don & # 8217 ; t worry about their & # 8217 ; s, they merely want to happen significance to it. They figure that if the King wants them dead that they must be really of import ; that their lives really had some worth.
Stoppard and Beckett both make great usage of game playing in these two dramas. Vladimir and Estragon make usage of game playing to go through the clip as they wait for Godot. Playing games keeps them busy and occupied as they wait. Beckett uses game playing to typify Vladimir and Estragon & # 8217 ; s ennui of life and of their present state of affairs. Game playing besides shows the deficiency of deepness of the characters. They have nil better to make so to seek and go through clip in an unconstructive manner. They basically have nil better to make with their lives but to sit and wait and play games. This goes along with the absurdist manner of thought. Life is meaningless from an absurdist position. Vladimir and Estragon are seen invariably playing word games with each other and trying to play games to maintain themselves busy. This keeps them from brooding on their current state of affairs, which is their delay for Godot and their hunt for a significance to their ain being. Stoppard & # 8217 ; s characters Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are besides found playing many games. This is basically used for the same intents that Beckett used it for with the exclusion of the coin tossing. The coin tossing does demo the ennui of their state of affairs, but it besides sets up a chief focal point in the drama which is the power of opportunity. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern besides play at a game of inquiries for the intent of live overing themselves of ennui. They even treat their responsibility to the King, similar to Hamlet, as a game. This is apparent on pages 56 and 57 when this conversation between Rosencrantz and Guildenstern takes topographic point:
Guil: We played it near to the thorax of class.
Ros ( scoffingly ) : & # 8221 ; Question and reply. Old ways are the best ways & # 8221 ; ! He was hiting off us all down the line.
Guil: He caught us on the incorrect pes one time or twice, possibly, but I thought we gained some land.
Ros ( merely ) : He murdered us.
Guil: He might hold had the border.
Ros ( roused ) : Twenty-seven? three, and you think he might hold had the border? ! He murdered us.
They use a marking system to see if they are doing any advancement in their responsibility to the King. They figure that in their first meeting with Hamlet that they made reasonably much no advancement, & # 8220 ; half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn & # 8217 ; t intend anything at all. & # 8221 ; This whole scene ties in with a old scene where the two are playing at a game of inquiries. This shows that they use game playing even in their serious responsibilities and that much of their being is deadening.
Neither of these characters can truly travel on without the company of the other ; they are wholly reliant on each other. In Waiting for Godot, Vladimir and Estragon rely on each other for comfort, support, and most of all, significance. Vladimir and Estragon need one another in order to avoid populating a alone and nonmeaningful life. At the terminal of act one, Didi and Gogo talk about their relationship, stating:
Tarragon: Delay! ( He moves off from Vladimir. ) I sometimes wonder if we wouldn & # 8217 ; Ts have been better off entirely, each one for himself. ( He crosses the phase and sits down on the hill. ) We weren & # 8217 ; t made for the same route.
Vladimir: ( without choler ) . It & # 8217 ; s non certain.
Tarragon: No, nil is certain.
Vladimir easy crosses the phase and sits down beside Estragon.
Vladimir: We can still portion if you think it would be better.
Tarragon: No, it & # 8217 ; s non worth while now.
Tarragon: Well shall we travel?
Vladimir: Yes lets go.
They do non travel. ( 35-36 )
The same conversation takes topographic point once more at the terminal of Act Two:
Tarragon: I can & # 8217 ; t travel on like this.
Vladimir: That & # 8217 ; s what you think.
Tarragon: If we parted that might be better for us.
Vladimir: We & # 8217 ; ll hang ourselves to-morrow. ( Pause ) . Unless Godot comes.
Tarragon: And if he comes?
Vladimir: We & # 8217 ; ll be saved. ( 61 )
In these scenes they consider go forthing each other but really ne’er do. This inability to go forth each others side reflects their uncertainness of life and their trust on each other. They are caught invariably oppugning their place in life. They don & # 8217 ; t know whether to remain, to kill themselves, to remain friends, or what. They are merely wholly overwhelmed by life and highly baffled characters. They have no thought how to manage life. Without each other to maintain themselves company and slightly free from ennui each character would be wholly lost and wouldn & # 8217 ; t cognize how to manage themselves. If they couldn & # 8217 ; t manage life as a brace, they & # 8217 ; d be doomed on their ain. On the right manus side of page 12, Estragon shows a fright of being entirely, when he says:
Tarragon: ( with attempt ) . Gogo light- bough non break- Gogo dead. Didi heavy- bough break- Didi entirely. Whereas-
Estragon is afraid that if Vladimir is hung foremost and
killed, that he’d be left entirely if his effort at self-destruction fails. He really fears being without Vladimir more so being dead. The same connexion can be made between Rosencrantz and Guildernstern. These two characters are ne’er split up during the drama until the terminal when they “disappear” or are put to decease. They need each other to maintain each other occupied particularly in such an inexplicable universe. This is apparent in the undermentioned lines of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead:
Guil: All right? you go that manner, I & # 8217 ; ll travel this manner.
They walk towards opposite wings. Ros arrests.
You go this manner? I & # 8217 ; ll travel that manner.
Guil: All right.
They march towards each other, cross. Ros arrests.
Ros: Wait a minute.
I think we should lodge together. He might be violent.
Guil: Good point. I & # 8217 ; ll come with you.
Guil Marches across to Ros. They turn to go forth. Ros arrests.
Ros: No, I & # 8217 ; ll come with you.
They turn, march across to the opposite wing. Ros arrests. Guil arrests.
Ros: I & # 8217 ; ll come with you, my manner.
Guil: All right.
They turn once more and process across. Ros arrests. Guil arrests.
Ros: I & # 8217 ; ve merely thought. If we both go, he could come here. That would be stupid, wouldn & # 8217 ; t it?
Guil: All right? I & # 8217 ; ll remain, you go.
Guil Marches to midstage.
Guil wheels and carries on processing back towards Ros, who starts processing downstage. They cross. Ros arrests.
I & # 8217 ; ve merely thought.
We ought to lodge together ; he might be violent.
Guil: Good point.
These lines on pages 87 and 88 show how reliant upon each other the two characters truly are. No affair what the instance they refuse to portion from one another & # 8217 ; s side. They even go so far to do up alibis so that they won & # 8217 ; Ts have to be entirely and so that they don & # 8217 ; Ts have to take any duties without the company and aid of the other. They invariably negate their old statements and travel against their original ideas. This makes the drama more amusing but besides shows how dull the characters are and how they struggle with determination devising. This besides shows how socially weak the characters truly are, much like Vladimir and Estragon.
The old lines from Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead non merely order the demand of company by the characters, but they besides show a major similarity in the manners of the two dramatists. This similarity is the usage of repeat. The usage of repeat by Stoppard and Beckett in these two dramas is used non merely to stress thoughts, but besides to give a feel of obtuseness and ennui. In Waiting of Godot, Beckett utilized this scheme to demo a boredom of being. This is apparent when Vladimir and Estragon continuously province the following lines throughout the drama:
Tarragon: Let & # 8217 ; s travel.
Vladimir: We can & # 8217 ; T.
Tarragon: Why non?
Vladimir: We are waiting for Godot.
This is merely one illustration of repeat in Godot. The drama apparently repeats itself. Act two is reasonably much a repetition of act one in the drama. Their lives in this drama are highly tiring. They invariably repeat the same inquiries to each other. Should they remain together or non, should they perpetrate self-destruction and should they portion are all inquiries they bring up and reiterate throughout the drama. In Rosencrantz and Guildenstern repeat creates the feeling of two characters waiting for something to go on. This is apparent when they are make up one’s minding whether or non to travel after Hamlet. They are oppugning the fact, but they figure in the center of their treatment that he may stop up traveling to where they are. They sort of repetition things to go through clip in hopes to see if something in their lives would go on. Besides Vladimir & # 8217 ; s repeat of Estragon & # 8217 ; s words and Rosencrantz & # 8217 ; s repeat of Guildenstern & # 8217 ; s further show the characters feelings of ennui. This usage of repeat by the characters occurs really frequently throughout the dramas. By reiterating each other it shows that the characters are similar, but besides that they are dependent upon each other for ideas. It shows a similitude between Rosencrantz and Vladimir and besides a similarity between Guildenstern and Estragon. The ulterior two are the wisest of the braces, while the anterior two are the followings and reasonably much the dullest of the characters.
Stoppard and Beckett besides portion common subjects in these two dramas. The capriciousness of life and the power of opportunity every bit good as the hopelessness of being are the two major subjects these two dramas portion. In Stoppard & # 8217 ; s work opportunity is the chief force in 1s life. This is apparent right from the really beginning of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead. The coin fliping scene that takes topographic point sets the full ambiance of the drama. A force decidedly has control over the events that occur in Rosencrantz and Guildenstern & # 8217 ; s lives. Guildenstern & # 8217 ; s losing at the coin flip and the fact that destiny plays a portion implies that a individual has no control over the forces of opportunity. Beckett shows that opportunity is a portion in one & # 8217 ; s life but the hopelessness of being naturals out any benefit that a individual may derive from it. They both feel that opportunity, non the person, determines what happens during the class of one & # 8217 ; s life. Stoppard knew that, like Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, we are all merely minor people in the whole game of life. Their life doctrine is really like the one Beckett created in Waiting for Godot. Just like in Godot, two characters are placed in an unfastened infinite to happen a significance to their being.
Waiting for Godot and Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead both have mentions to an unobserved audience. The characters in these dramas show a fright of falling out of sight. The Player in Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead explains: & # 8221 ; You don & # 8217 ; t understand the humiliation of it? to be tricked out of the individual premise that makes our being viable? that person is watching. & # 8221 ; If no 1 is watching so they are reasonably much useless as histrions. They play to audiences to be seen and heard, and if no 1 is their observation it is all reasonably much useless. Estragon provinces on page 56: ( to Vlad. ) & # 8220 ; Don & # 8217 ; Ts take your eyes off me. & # 8221 ; And on page 58, Vladimir says as portion of a address: & # 8221 ; & # 8230 ; . at me person is looking. & # 8221 ; These lines point at an unobserved audience. They are afraid to fall out of sight because that would intend that they would no longer be. This suggest that they may perchance be cognizant that they are really portion of a drama besides. And therefore their lives would be defined by the drama.
Waiting for Godot and Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead both show, as absurdist play would, the nonsense of life. In Godot, Vladimir & # 8217 ; s and Estragon & # 8217 ; s actions dictate their survival much like ours do. As an audience, we can merely watch them make the same things, listen to them state the same things, and accept the fact that Godot may or may non come. The drama shows us that we may seek for an reply or a significance to life and our being, but we most probably will ne’er happen it. Godot may ne’er come at all and we must accept the uncertainness of our lives. Through Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead, Stoppard tells us that decease comes to all living things and is something that can ne’er be understood or explained, but it is merely something that is. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern hunt for replies, but in the terminal are merely left without any existent replies. Life to Stoppard merely is, it can & # 8217 ; t be explained and if they would non hold stressed over happening a significance to it they would hold led much happier lives.
As you can see Beckett and Stoppard shared many common positions in making their dramas. When reading Waiting for Godot and Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead, it becomes really obvious that it goes manner beyond commonalties in their manners. When reading their dramas it becomes clear that some signifier of idealisation or grasp of Beckett & # 8217 ; s work by Stoppard was the chief ground for the birth of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead. The subjects, word picture, and even the construction of the dramas show that Stoppard did compose with an influence from the plants of Beckett.