Free Will In Stoppard's Rosencrantz And Guildenstern

The idea of fate or free will is something that is often linked to human nature and is reflected in many pieces of writing. They poke and prod the reader of these two beliefs, and allow them to determine the reasoning behind each character’s actions. Examples would include the play Macbeth, Oedipus and the film The Adjustment Bureau, as the main characters make decisions based with or against the newfound knowledge. Overall, it is considered that fate often dictates the influential choices, while free will consists of everyday life activities.

It is an either or situation. Some people may think MAcbeth is controlled by fate, but quite a few people think Macbeth had complete free will. The reason people think that is because Macbeth “chose” to kill. The other reason people think Macbeth had free will is because he had the choice to deny Lady Macbeth and her wishes to have him do evil things. Another reason people may think Macbeth was controlled by free will is because he could have just stopped killing, he could have killed once and then moved on and stopped, but decided to kill more to solidate his power.

The theme of corruption throughout the play, Hamlet, starts at the head, and then drips down into the body in the same way that a crooked government eventually leads to ruins its citizens lives. The unwholesome and immoral leadership in Honduras, lead to the citizens not succeeding or thriving in their communities. The citizens of Honduras are in a constant state of confusion and panic, because of the unjust head of the Honduran government. The entirety of the country is consequently failing. In this same way, because of Old King Hamlet's death, Gertrude's remarriage, and Polonius's murder, the children in the play experience great madness and confusion.

The ideas of fate and freewill have been debated on for years. Citizens of the twenty-first century often believe that life is a combination of fate and personal choices. The truth is, the question has gone through all of our minds whether we know of it or not. Are our lives predetermined or do we pave our own paths? To this day, when something goes wrong in my life, my parents often tell me “it was meant to be.”

Almost every character in the tragedy, Hamlet by Shakespeare intentionally or unintentionally deceives others by not showing who they really are or how they really feel. Hamlet is the greatest example of deceiving others because throughout the whole play he is never truly showing who he is or how he feels unless he’s alone and the audience or readers are the only ones who really know who he truly is. How ever what the readers and audience cannot decide on is whether or not hamlet deceives the other characters on purpose for a greater accomplishment or do the events that occur to him really change who he was in the beginning of the play. The plays main focus is based on hamlet’s way of viewing the other characters and how to make them feel like he wants them to feel. Hamlet deceives them so he can get everyone to think the way he wants them to think.

This work was quite unique for it used Hamlet to tell the story of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, two side characters. The play effectively captured Shakespeare's tone, exploring themes of identity, free will, and the absurdity of life. It was interesting how the play mostly retained the dialogue of the original scenes from Hamlet while adding additional scenes around them. I found it fascinating how Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, in a constant state of confusion, simply went with the flow of events because they did not know what else to do. This perspective captured the tumultuous and bizarre nature of

Contrasting his attitudes with the moments that the king walks in, his behavior towards Polonius while the play is preparing, and his actions to Ophelia during the play, Hamlet is sporadic, when alone with Horatio, he is calm and collected, then again the sudden resumption to his “antic disposition” when Rosencrantz and Guildenstern enter. There is a long break in which we don’t sense any insanity from Hamlet, this is due to the fact that he has no need to assume his disguise. When we find Hamlet with the players, he is giving them directions for the play. With the players, Hamlet acts normal and of sound mind because the players are not likely to betray him, they don’t have the opportunity or the wish to do so.

A very important concept relating to free will can be seen in Virgil’s discussion about mental love. Virgil first introduces the concept of natural and mental love. “The natural is always without error...or err through too much or too little vigor.” (Purg. 17. 94-96) Since natural love can never err, mental love always has that tendency to turn towards the wrong thing.

Fate Versus Free Will In Macbeth Fate versus free will is a theme well known throughout literature and in life as well. Is life controlled by fate, or are people’s lives dependent on the choices they make? In Macbeth, Shakespeare emphasizes the idea of fate vs. freewill, indicating that both elements play a role in the lives of individuals, as well as society as a whole. The main character, Macbeth’s, life is a combination of fate and his conscious decisions. The witches in Macbeth can control the fates of many, but only to a point.

Gianni Figliozzi Larrimore English 9 2/21/2023 Shakespearean Free Will A person's free will cannot be changed, only masked. The characters in A Midsummer Night’s Dream by, William Shakespeare have the free will to not be influenced by the actions of others. The characters are not changed by magic, death, or mockery. The concept of free will in the play is strongly shown. The characters have the free will to act as they please, they are not manipulated by others.

In the play Hamlet by William Shakespeare, the minor characters Rosencrantz and Guildenstern play supporting roles and are shunted to the side, not having much choice in their decisions and merely “moving” along with the decisions of other characters. However, in the play Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead by Tom Stoppard, they are the central figures and echo Hamlet’s inner thoughts that aren’t shown during the play Hamlet. The coexistence of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead and Hamlet shows the futility of opposing fate and that the spectators, or the minor characters, are perpetually going to be “acting” and staring in on the stage of fate. Guildenstern and Rosencrantz as spectators is best illustrated when Guildenstern says to

Free will allows freedom of choice. Free will is the ability to choose with intelligence and common sense. Our choices cannot be completely free from our knowledge, values, perceptions of everyday life and the things around us. Our choices are not free from the influence of our past thoughts and decisions. The freedom of free will is not discrediting influencing factors such as our own self-awareness, our ability to seek out knowledge and project the future, and our awareness of our own thinking.

Fate versus free will – this is one of the many philosophies that William Shakespeare examines in Julius Caesar. There are two interesting forces, fate and free will throughout the play that are fighting for control over men. Fate was shown in the many prophecies and omens that characters viewed throughout Act II. Free will was the characters ability to overcome their fate. Shakespeare shows a delicate balance between the two forces.

Tom Stoppard's Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead is an existentialist play. A core value of existentialists is that there is no absolute certainty. People never know what is coming next. They don't know what to expect. The play, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead, is full of uncertainty.

Though Hamlet is aware of what things may come under the rule of his uncle, he is slow to action, which some might contribute to his"extreme sensitive nature" (Knight 3); however, deep down Hamlet harbors a need to be completely sure of the facts surrounding his father's death before he can convince himself to take action. Hamlet's own insecurities about whether or not he should take action severely halts his efforts at canceling fate, and it may be argued that his insecurities even made it stronger. On the other hand, it can be argued that Hamlet is simply enacting his free will in the way that he chooses to wait and be sure, rather than to take action against Claudius right away as his father's ghost wants him to. This brings about an internal conflict for Hamlet because outwardly, one is able to see that he is nervous of Denmark's fate, comparing it to "an unweeded garden that grows to seed" (Shakespeare 1.2.135-136) under Claudius' reign. Perhaps if Hamlet did not wait so long to take action, he might have been able to save many lives and rule the kingdom himself, thus changing the country's fate.