Rosencrantz and Guildenstern in Hamlet: Life on the Margins

This blog is written as a task assigned by the head of the Department of English (MKBU), Prof. and Dr. Dilip Barad Sir. Here is the link to the professor's worksheet for background reading: Click here.

{getToc} $title={Table of Contents} $count={false}

Marginalization in Hamlet:
Describe how Rosencrantz and Guildenstern represent marginal figures in Hamlet. How does Hamlet’s reference to Rosencrantz as a “sponge” reflect their expendability in the power dynamics of the play?

Rosencrantz and Guildenstern represent marginal figures in ‘Hamlet’ as they lack true agency. They exist only to serve the interests of more powerful characters like King Claudius and Hamlet. Their primary role in the play is as spies for Claudius, sent to manipulate and uncover Hamlet’s intentions. They are sacrificed in the deadly power play between Hamlet and Claudius, embodying how marginal characters can be easily exploited and discarded by those in power. 

Hamlet’s reference to Rosencrantz as a “sponge” powerfully reflects their expendability. He tells Rosencrantz: 

“That soaks up the king’s countenance, his rewards, his authorities. But such officers do the king best service in the end. He keeps them, like an ape, in the corner of his jaw; first mouthed, to be last swallowed.”  

Here, Hamlet links Rosencrantz to a sponge that absorbs whatever the king dispenses, be it praises, rewards, or power. However, just as a sponge is eventually wrung out and discarded, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern will be “squeezed” by Claudius once they have served their purpose. This metaphor highlights their function as tools for the king, illustrating their lack of individual value and independence.

Modern Parallels to Corporate Power:
The passage compares Rosencrantz and Guildenstern to modern workers impacted by corporate downsizing and globalization. Reflect on this parallel: How does their fate in Hamlet mirror the displacement experienced by workers when multinational companies relocate or downsize?

Rosencrantz and Guildenstern in Hamlet are like modern workers who can be easily replaced. They are used by the king and then thrown away when they are no longer needed. This is similar to how companies today fire workers when they are no longer profitable. Both Rosencrantz and Guildenstern and these workers are at the mercy of those in power. They have no control over their fate and are easily sacrificed for the benefit of others.

The shifting priorities of multinational corporations, which may prioritize profit over employee stability in the contemporary time revealed the two characters. However, once they are no longer useful—once they’ve “soaked up” the king’s orders like “sponges”—they are cast aside without a second thought. Ultimately, they are sent to England, unaware that they are actually being sacrificed, which leads to their deaths.

Workers in globalized industries may be displaced or lose their livelihoods when companies relocate operations to cut costs. Additionally, just as Claudius never reveals his true intentions, companies often make these decisions with little transparency, leaving workers with little control over their futures. This parallel highlights how hierarchical structures in both literature and modern corporate settings can exploit individuals. It emphazied that those lower in status frequently bear the consequences of decisions made by those in power. 

In "Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead", people utilize one another quite a deal, and the fact that the main characters, "Ros and Guil", never seem to be in control of their circumstances may be attributable to their naive inability to know how to do so. In many ways, manipulation is like directing a play in that it involves having the power to influence how things turn out. To influence the audience's thoughts and feelings, a play is investigated as a form of audience manipulation.

Existential Questions in Stoppard’s Re-interpretation:
In Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead, Stoppard deepens their marginalization by questioning their existence and purpose. Why might Stoppard emphasize their search for meaning in a world indifferent to them? How does this mirror the feeling of powerlessness in today’s corporate environments?

Later in the 20th century Tom Stoppard re-writes these two characters in his play, "Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead". In this play, Stoppard further alienates these two characters and place them into postmodern context. This work was published in 1966, and it was the time when post War disillusionment and technological progress was it's peak. Writers like Albert Camus, Samuel Beckett, and Herold Pinter writing about fragmented identity, human nature. and absurdism of postmodern world. 

In the similar manner, Tom Stoppard had put these two characters in more absurd way then they were in Hamlet. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern represent typical human beings, stuck on a journey aboard "spaceship Earth," reflecting life in the 20th or 21st century. Their voyage has no clear destination, except for the inevitable end that is death, for individuals who are, in a way, already lifeless or lost. Corporate workers also are like same they just work constantly day and night with thinking about their self, family and friends, and still they seem marginalized in the eyes of corporate tycoons.

Cultural and Economic Power Structures:
Compare Shakespeare’s treatment of power in Hamlet to Stoppard’s reimagining. How does each work
critique systems that marginalize “little people”? How might Stoppard’s existential take resonate with
contemporary issues of job insecurity and corporate control?

Shakespeare’s ‘Hamlet’ and Stoppard’s ‘Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead’ both critique systems that marginalise the “little people,” but each does so from a unique perspective on power and agency. 

In ‘Hamlet’, Shakespeare portrays power as an unyielding force within a hierarchical society, where those who lack influence—like Rosencrantz and Guildenstern—are manipulated and discarded by those in authority. These characters are used as pawns by King Claudius, who calls them to court solely to spy on Hamlet, and by Hamlet himself, who coldly accepts their deaths, saying:

“They are not near my conscience”  

(Act V, Scene ii)

This treatment reflects the Elizabethan power dynamics of the time, where political machinations often dictated individuals’ fates, exposing how those without power are inevitably marginalised.

Stoppard reimagines these themes through an existential lens, focusing on the disorientation and confusion of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern as they grapple with their purpose. In ‘Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead’, the two characters are bewildered by their lack of agency, endlessly questioning their roles and unable to understand why they are there, reflecting a modern sense of alienation. Stoppard deepens the sense of marginalization by making Rosencrantz and Guildenstern embody the absurdity of human existence in a world that seems indifferent to their suffering. Unlike Shakespeare’s view of power as a tangible, hierarchical force, Stoppard presents a more abstract critique of existential powerlessness, where individuals lack not just influence but even a meaningful role in the narrative of their lives.

Personal Reflection:
How does the marginalization of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern in Hamlet relate to the modern experience of being seen as a dispensable “asset”? Reflect on how these parallels shape your understanding of Cultural Studies and power dynamics.

The play presents a clear hierarchy, with Claudius at the top and characters like Rosencrantz and Guildenstern at the bottom. laudius uses his power to manipulate and control others, including Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. Their tragic end is a consequence of their blind loyalty and the manipulations of a monarchy indifferent to their fate. This blind loyalty reminded the "Boxer" in the Animal Farm where his mantra was "I will work hard". It is often seen that workers loyalty is misused by the compnies.

In Stoppard’s work, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are painfully aware of their purposelessness and confusion, constantly searching for meaning in a narrative they cannot control. Similar to Stanley and Vladimir their existental question along with the realisation of purposlessness hammer the present.

In the corporate capitalist society important decisions are made by a select few at the top, often without consulting or involving those lower down the hierarchy. The reasons behind decisions may not be transparent or understandable to those affected by them.

Reflecting on these works makes me consider how relevant Shakespeare’s and Stoppard’s critiques remain in today’s world, where job security and autonomy can feel increasingly fragile. In an environment of rapid corporate restructuring and globalization most of the people may relate to the disorientation and lack of control that Rosencrantz and Guildenstern experience.

Stoppard's play really resonates with how people feel lost and confused in today's world. It's like people are just going through the motions, without any real sense of purpose. This is especially true in big companies and organizations, where individuals can feel small and insignificant.

Creative Engagement:
Comparative Analysis: Write a 500-700 word analysis on how themes of power and marginalization in Hamlet are adapted in Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead.

Shakespeare’s Hamlet famously portrays Rosencrantz and Guildenstern as peripheral figures — courtiers summoned by King Claudius to spy on Hamlet, but easily manipulated and ultimately expendable. Their marginal status in Hamlet highlights the power dynamics at play: they are tools of the court, without agency, serving the king’s agenda. Hamlet even refers to Rosencrantz as a “sponge,” emphasizing how they absorb and reflect the commands of those above them, yet retain no real identity or control. In this sense, the two characters epitomize the powerless “little people” in a rigid hierarchical system.

Tom Stoppard’s Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead takes this marginalization and flips the lens: he brings these two often-overlooked characters to center stage, but in doing so, underscores how deeply entangled they remain in the structures of power. Despite being the protagonists of Stoppard’s play, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are still bound by a narrative not of their making — a script written by Shakespeare in Hamlet. Their helplessness is not just social but existential.

One major way Stoppard explores power is by stripping them of agency. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern fail to make “significant choices” throughout the play; their lives appear governed by randomness, chance, and external design rather than their own will. They are shuttled from scene to scene — from woods, to court, to a ship — without real decision-making, illustrating how power flows over them rather than through them.

This idea intersects with free will: in Stoppard’s play, free will becomes almost an illusion. Their decisions and actions are overwhelmed by a larger predetermined trajectory. The two characters are like passengers in a boat: they can “rattle about,” but ultimately, they are carried inexorably toward their fate. This reflects how, even in Hamlet, they are puppets of greater forces — political authority, royal mandates, or narrative inevitability.

Stoppard also turns to identity to critique power. In Hamlet, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are almost interchangeable — mistaken for one another, called by the wrong name — which suggests how little Claudius or Hamlet truly values their individuality. In the reimagining, Stoppard intensifies this loss of self. Their identities are porous: they forget names, mix up body parts, and struggle to distinguish themselves from their doppelgängers in the Players' troupe. Their confusion becomes a metaphor for powerlessness: if you don’t even have a stable name or self, how do you exert power or resist fate?

Power in Shakespeare’s Hamlet is also visible in how Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are disposable — their deaths are ordered and carried out without fanfare. Stoppard amplifies this by forcing them to confront their doom more directly. Though they were minor in Hamlet, in Stoppard’s play they grapple with their mortality through existential reflection. Death, in this version, is not only inevitable but deeply personal and absurd. Their passivity — their inability to act when faced with the letter that seals their fate — makes their marginalization even more tragic: they are not just minor characters, but passive participants in their own end.

Another powerful contrast comes through metatheatre. Stoppard uses theatrical devices — a “play within a play within a play” — to highlight how Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are trapped in the mechanisms of the story. The Player’s troupe mirrors their lives, underscoring that even in performance, they never fully escape the script laid out for them. The tension between art and reality becomes a metaphor for larger power dynamics: just as the theater directs their fate, so too does the royal court in Hamlet.

By focusing on these marginal characters, Stoppard not only humanizes them but also critiques hierarchical systems that render some people invisible. In Hamlet, their deaths are reported offstage, almost as an afterthought. In Stoppard’s version, their philosophical questioning — about identity, death, and design — forces the audience to reckon with those who are written off in traditional narratives. Their marginalization becomes the lens through which we examine how systems of power devalue individuals and deny them meaning.

In sum, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead reinterprets Hamlet’s themes of power and marginalization by recentering minor characters, yet persistently showing their entrapment in a design not of their making. Through existential angst, loss of identity, and metatheatrical structure, Stoppard amplifies Shakespeare’s critique of power: that the “little people” are not just ignored, but structurally disadvantaged — their fates determined by others, with little agency or recognition. The play thus becomes a powerful modern reflection on how hierarchical systems echo both onstage and off, and how marginalization, though sometimes peripheral in the story, remains central to the human experience.

References:

Barad, Dilip. (2024). Thinking Activity: Exploring Marginalization in Shakespeare’s Hamlet and Stoppard’s Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead. 10.13140/RG.2.2.25871.80807. 

Guerin, Wilfred L. A Handbook of Critical Approaches to Literature. Oxford University Press, 2005.

Shakespeare, William. Hamlet. Edited by G. R. Hibbard, Oxford UP, 2008.

Stoppard, Tom. Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead. Atlantic Books, 1994.