ThAct: CS - Hamlet

 Exploring Marginalization in Shakespeare’s Hamlet and Stoppard’s Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead

This blog is part of a thinking activity assigned by Dilip Sir for Cultural Studies (Paper No. 205). The objective is to analyze the marginalization of minor characters in Hamlet and connect it to broader themes of power and systemic marginalization, with insights into modern corporate hierarchies.

Marginalization in Hamlet

Shakespeare’s Hamlet introduces Rosencrantz and Guildenstern as characters placed at the periphery, serving primarily as tools of the crown rather than fully developed personalities with autonomy. Tasked with spying on Hamlet, their lives and loyalties are controlled by the king. Hamlet’s description of Rosencrantz as a “sponge” captures their expendable role: they absorb the king’s orders without question, only to be “wrung out” when no longer useful. Sent to England with a sealed fate, they ultimately perish, underscoring the dangers of being pawns in a larger game—a stark commentary on the disposability of those outside the main power circle.

Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are like "sponge"s. Hamlet compares them to sponges because they absorb the king's orders without question. They are just tools for the king, and when they are no longer needed, they can be discarded. This shows how people who are not powerful can be easily used and thrown away by those in power. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are sent to England to kill Hamlet, but they end up dying themselves. This highlights the danger of being a pawn in someone else's game.

Cultural approach and practice to culture in ‘Hamlet’

Shakespeare’s most of the work in human studies and also he observes were motivated by an educational and political ideal called (in Latin) humanity the idea that all of the capabilities and virtues peculiar to human beings should be studied and developed to their furthest extent. In several instances earlier in this chapter we noted the cultural and new historical emphases on power relationships. Now, let us approach Shakespeare’s Hamlet with a view to seeing power in its cultural context. 

• Two marginalized characters in Hamlet: Rosencrantz and Guildenstern

In this play in hamlet we see that to two characters Rosencrantz and Guildenstern in also the king Claudius use to power in this persons and it may be that to political and culture ideas in  this text. We know that true reality to hamlet in his life his friend also his favor but in power position king Claudius in between to sent England and his ambitions to kill hamlet into his friend . In response to Claudius ‘s plan to send hamlet to England , Rosencrantz delivers a speech that if read out of context is both an excellent set of metaphors and a summations of the Elizabethan concepts of role and  power of kingship: 

The singular and peculiar life is bound

With all the strength and armor of the mind

To keep itself from noyance but much more

That spirit upon whose weal depends and rests 

The lives of many .the cease of majesty 

Dies not alone, but like a gulf doth draw

What’s near it with it? It is a massy wheel

 Fixed on the summit of the highest mount,

To whose huge spoken ten thousand lesser things

Are mortised and adjoined; which, when it falls,

Each small annexment, petty consequences,

Attends the boisterous ruin: never alone

Did the king sign but with a general groan.

In this passage we can see that thoughtful and imagistically successful passage worthy of a wise and accomplished statesman. It wants us to have a lance at once marginalized characters we are not given enough important and those who should have been given recognitions in their lives. In that culture I ‘Hamlet’ political. In other word, Power and indeed on all matter to hand of the king. But how many readers and viewers  are of the play would rank this passage among the best-known lines of the play and also with Hamlet’s soliloquies  for instance or with the kings effort to prays, or even with the aphorisms addressed by Polonius to his son leartes? We know that venture to say that the passage intrinsically good if one looks at it alone, is simply not well known.

                          

       In spite of having access of excellent they have been marginalized and hamlet being a hero. From a wealthy and royal family has been put into category of a moral hero. Who has a few lacks also? The questions arises about the people will be notice it? The agreement is only a reaffirmation of what they had told the king when he first received them court. The two are distinctly plot-driven: empty of personality, sycophantic in a sniveling way eager to curry favors with power even if it means spying on their erstwhile friend. They admit without mush skill at denial that they ‘’were sent for’’. So that meaning of there are less successful and also they try to play on hamlet’s metaphorical ‘’pipe’’ to know his ‘’stops’’ when they are forced to admit that they could not even handle the literal musical instrument that Hamlet shows them. still later these nonentities  meet their destine ‘non-boringness’ as it were when   hamlet  who, can play the pipe so much more efficiently  substituted  their names in the death warrant intended for him.

So that in this Rosencrantz and Guildenstern report back to King Claudius after their conversation with Hamlet They have very little to tell the King, who opens the scene by asking. The only good news they have for the King is that Hamlet was greatly cheered to hear about the arrival of the traveling players and that he ordered them to put on a performance. Claudius is very pleased to hear about this show of interest on the part of his melancholy stepson. And also we see to Claudius power to this two people and hamlet also remembered to these ideas in his mind. And also see that conversion to Claudius and Rosencrantz like that:

"And can you, by no drift of conference,

Get from him why he puts on this confusion,

Grating so harshly all his days of quiet

With turbulent and dangerous lunacy?"

Rosencrantz says,

"He does confess he feels himself distracted,

But from what cause he will by no means speak."

And Guildenstern adds,

"Nor do we find him forward to be sounded,

But with a crafty madness keeps aloof

When we would bring him on to some confession

Of his true state."

The King's interview with Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. Nothing much is accomplished except to establish that the King and Queen will be attending the play Hamlet has ordered the players to perform. In play these nonentities meet their destined “non-beingness” as it were, when hamlet who can play the pipe so much more efficiently substitutes their names in the death warrant intended for him. In say something Rosencrantz and Guildenstern also to struggle and to say that the mighty struggle between powerful antagonists is the stuff of this play is hardly original. But our emphasis in the present reading is that one can gain a further insight into the play. In last of the play into inform to hamlet his friend are death. Both are distinctly plot-driven: empty of personality, sycophantic in a sniveling way, eager to curry favor with power even if it means spying on their erstwhile friend. In a moment of trickery on his own part, Hamlet blithely substitutes a forged document bearing their names rather than his as the ones to be “put to sudden death, not shriving time allowed” when horatio responds laconically with so Guildenstern and Rosencrantz go to hamlet is unmoved, and last as well as Shakespeare mind to ‘hamlet’ is done with these two characters “they are not rear, conscience”. And last this two are death between to power and it may be that marginalized are not social support and both are death in end the play.

•           Death of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern

In this play in cultural studies to practice into cultural approach and such some example and also wrote to Tom Stoppard play in protagonist to this two characters Guildenstern and Rosencrantz. It is instructive to note that the reality of power refractive a Shakespeare time might in another and culture reflect a radically different worldview. Let us enrich our response to hamlet by looking at related culture and philosophical manifestation from the 20th century. In 20th century the dead or never living Guildenstern and Rosencrantz were resuscrited by Tom Stoppard in a fascinating re-seeing of their existence it lack. In Stoppard’s version they are even more obviously two ineffectual pawns, seeking constantly to know who they are here and where are going. Whether they “are” at all may be the ultimate question of this modern play.

 

In “Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are dead”, he has given the contemporary audience a play that examines existential questions in the context of a whole world that may have no meaning at all. Although it is not our intentions to examine that play in great detail. And also marginalized two person view and it may be that Guildenstern and Rosencrantz are archetypal human beings caught up on a ship and also should been spaceship earth for the 20th or 21th century that leads nowhere, and Hamlet is except to death and persons who are already dead and if these two characters were marginalized in Hamlet, they are even more so in Stoppard’s handing. 
                                                    If Shakespeare marginalized the powerless in his version of Guildenstern and Rosencrantz and also you can see that to cultural and historical view that was shakespear is radically reworked to reflection a cultural and philosophical view of another time and our own. And if philosophical way to tom Stoppard goes too far some consider a much more mundane phenomenon of the later 20th century and we except. Both are caught up in the corporate downsizing and mergers in recent decades the effect on these workers when multinational companies move factories and office around the world like pawns on a chessboard. And Shakespeare and Stoppard’s Guildenstern and Rosencrantz characters are no more than what Rosencrantz called a “small annexment” and also says that “petty consequence mere nothing for the massy wheel of the king”.

•      Example to America at power use into world country.

In this cultural studies in also ancient and modern are in power use to only marginalized people and face to more struggle and in between today America is power position and he rules about to other country and also governs to their ideas to poor and not developing countries. American democracy has always been messy, rough and unruly. The political process has suffered under rampant manipulation, cheating and corruption. Even so, democracy has delivered and made America not only the world’s supreme power but also its lighthouse socially and culturally. Today, by common consensus, the American political system is dysfunctional and Washington bogged down in gridlock. This week's series of articles by Stein Ringen explores the state of democracy in America, covering gerrymandering and electoral fairness, presidential power and the use of signing statements, court activism and the Supreme Court, the incapacity of Congress, and the health of democracy overall. Obama left Saturday on a brief visit to New Delhi, where he will hold talks with Modi on military hardware co-production, clean energy research and trade before heading to Saudi Arabia to meet the new king, Salman bin Abdul-Aziz.

                          

                            We can see that America president meet to two country p.m. and it be can protect and help us and then America has fight this country each other. So that in America has power use to wrong way and it may be that china and Indian  have fight to between war of nuclear .Whatever differences there are between the Indian and U.S. positions—and there are some—could be easier to navigate thanks to the leaders' shared experiences. Both men rose to national power from humble origins. Obama, the nation's first black president, grew up without a father following his parents' divorce. Modi in his youth worked as a chai wallah or "tea boy," serving rail passengers in Gujarat, the state he would later run as chief minister. Both men run disciplined, leak-averse administrations that revolve around their personal appeal not their party label. Neither man enjoys the back-slapping, faux-friendliness of conventional politics. In this meeting in Obama and P.M. Modi also as political and also Osama’s personal means America person self and economical view and it may be his own benefit to visit Indian.

                                                         And we see in any time America is always to his benefit and his own selfishness to this country and America first help to developing country and last he became fight and wrong kind of question in world and it may be that political, economical and his own benefit to any other way for poor country. In some way America and china are ruling country and it may be that political, economical, and army, science, nuclear bomb protect and give to other county and it may be that different and fight to irack- Iran, Indian -Pakistan and his own fight to Russian and we see that to power and economic and political support to his neighing country. Some of the information may come as a surprise to many people. In fact, I know it will be a surprise and then some, because of a recent study (Norton & Ariely, 2010) showing that most Americans (high income or low income, female or male, young or old, Republican or Democrat) have no idea just how concentrated the wealth distribution actually and More than a protecting power is a state which somehow protects another state, and represents the interests of the protected state's citizens in a third state. And America Protecting power" refers to a relationship that may occur when two sovereign states do not have diplomatic relations.

  

                              In this cultural studies into ‘Hamlet’ two characters Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are marginalized and we see that to the king Claudius protect his power, it may be that power a ways to people under to power position and we know that our culture  and religious  has to law  class people ruling his. And my perspective in cultural studies into power has upper and also we see that in real life power position men at rule that time. Why powers protect marginalized people? And present time America has power position and he protect to other developing country fight and world war. Where America has help to developing country? We see that to context cultural a study in hamlet has not react to his friends are death. So those in culture at Shakespeare play Hamlet into both ruling to Claudius power and remember that to Elizabethan age in many kings at rule under to power and ancient time has to present day. So here may be example to America and other country fight and America has protected to power.

·       Conclusions

So that in cultural studies Hamlet in marginalization to two characters Rosencrantz and Guildenstern at power into King Claudius. At that time in realty to the king and rich upper class many times fight and used power to marginalized people. It became realty and also culture has create to everything  and minority to marginalized to society, we see to this two characters Rosencrantz and Guildenstern  are dead in play any one not remembered  to then. Thus that in the play Hamlet I apply to culture and real example give as to ruling and power positions countries.

Thank You.

Beckman, Jeff. “Eye-opening Statistics on Job Displacement Due to Automation (2023 Data).” Techreport, 28 May 2024, techreport.com/statistics/business-workplace/job-displacement-due-to-automation.

Kumar, Sanjeev. “HAMLET AND ROSENCRANTZ AND GUILDENSTERN ARE DEAD - a TEXTUAL STUDY.” International Journal of Novel Research and Development, by IJNRD, vol. 8, no. 1, Jan. 2023, pp. b573–75. www.ijnrd.org/papers/IJNRD2301171.pdf.

S Sreejith, and S Sreejith. “For Eight Million Indians, Life Is a Gig and a Mostly Terrible One at That.” The New Indian Express, 16 July 2024, www.newindianexpress.com/web-only/2024/Jul/16/for-eight-million-indians-life-is-a-gig-and-a-mostly-terrible-one-at-that.

“Stoppard’s Space Men: Rosencrantz and Guildenstern on Film on JSTOR.” www.jstor.org. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/43797454-https://jstor-mkbu.refread.com.

Thinking Activity: Exploring Marginalization in Shakespeare’s Hamlet and Stoppard’s Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead. Research Gate, Oct. 2024, www.researchgate.net/publication/385301805_Thinking_Activity_Exploring_Marginalization_in_Shakespeare's_Hamlet_and_Stoppard's_Rosencrantz_and_Guildenstern_Are_Dead. Accessed 5 Nov. 2024.