Bugs in Amber
Definition of the major theme of Tom Stoppard's Rosencrantz and
Guildenstern are Dead - "we are bugs trapped in amber"
Marek Vit
That we, people, are "bugs in amber" is one of the main
themes of Kurt Vonnegut's novel Slaughterhouse-Five; or
Children's Crusade. Tom Stoppard's play Rosencrantz and
Guildenstern are Dead is, in my opinion, very similar to this
book. While Slaugterhouse-Five is an American novel, a mixture of
the author's Second World War experiences and science fiction
genre, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead is a British play
set into William Shakespeare's Hamlet. What are these two
literary works similar in, then? It is the central theme. Both
works show that we are physically stuck in this world, our future
is already given, and we have no way of escaping our destiny.
Both writers provide a little room for their character's
imagination which is, in my opinion, crucial item of both
literary works.
In this paper I will try to use Kurt Vonnegut's novel to
help me point out the major theme of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern
are Dead and to explain and clarify the theme's meaning and main
message.
The main theme of Slaughterhouse-Five is expressed several
times throughout the novel. One of the examples is the passage
which shows (from the view of the Tralfamadorians -- alien
beings) that the future is given and that one cannot change it.
"All moments, past, present, and future, always have
existed, always will exist. The Tralfamadorians can look at all
the different moments just the way we can look at a stretch of
the Rocky Mountains, for instance." (Vonnegut:27)
Another passage of the novel describes the theme more directly.
It is the part when the Tralfamadorians kidnap Billy Pilgrim and
he asks "why?".
"Have you ever seen bugs trapped in amber?
Well, here we are, Mr. Pilgrim, trapped in the amber of this
moment. There is no why." (ibid 76-77)
These two passages illustrate the novel's theme quite fully.
We are physically stuck in this world and we can do nothing about
it.
As the "amber" in Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead
serves William Shakespeare's play Hamlet. Both the author and the
characters are stuck in it. There is no way out, there can
possibly be no way for Rosencrantz and Guildenstern to avoid
their death at the end. Just like Billy in Slaughterhouse-Five
they have foreknowledge of their death, yet they can do nothing
about it at all. They all have to continue as directed, because
they are stuck in amber.
All characters, Billy Pilgrim, Guildenstern and Rosencrantz
now may seem like puppets. They seem like they have no free will,
they are "led" from above. Vonnegut's characters have been
describes as "comic, pathetic pieces, juggled about by some
inexplicable faith, like puppets," (Ranly:494). This also
corresponds with Ranly's idea that there are no villains or
heroes in Vonnegut's books. I think that this could also be
applied to Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. "They answer summons
from some source they do not recognize, carry out the task they
do not understand to end in the darkness they do not want to
think about," (Weales:237-8). No character from the two books can
be blamed for anything, bad or good, that happens. They are led
from above. The only one who can be blamed is the "Master
Puppeteer" who controls his little pieces. In Slaughter-
house-Five it can only be God. He is the one, after all, who put
us into the amber, the one who "led" the people into such an evil
as World War Two. He can be the only villain in the novel.
Similarly, the only villain in Rosencrantz and Guildenstern
are Dead can only be William Shakespeare, the author of the
"amber". Shakespeare may be seen in the same way as God in
Slaughterhouse-Five -- as the one who created the tragedies of
human lives. Both these "supreme" beings provided the "amber",
both forgot about their creations and consider them to be mere
tools for moving the "great story" onward. Each of the literary
works is, in Charles Marowitz's words, "a blinding metaphor about
the absurdity of life. We are summoned, we come. We are given
roles, we play them. We are dismissed, we go. Have we ever been?
Has there been a point? If so, what?" (Marowitz:327). Stoppard's
characters, when considering the point, advise not to apply
logic, or justice (Stoppard:81)
The characters in both works, however, are not seen as mere
puppets. Both authors made them human by allowing a space for
their imagination. They can't do anything about their destiny,
but they can think about it. Billy Pilgrim shows himself as human
being by asking the Tralfamadorians "why?" (Vonnegut:76-77).
Stoppard has also made his characters human by giving them "space
and leisure to broach abstruse philosophical questions..."
(Hayman:36):
"Free to move, speak, extemporize, and yet. We have not been
cut loose. Our truancy is defined by one fixed star, and our
drift represents merely a slight change of angle to it: we may
seize the moment, toss it around while the moment pass, a short
dash here, an exploration there, but we are brought round full
circle to face again the single immutable fact--that we,
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, bearing a letter from one king to
another, are taking Hamlet to England." (Stoppard:74)
In my opinion, the authors wanted to show that this is where
humans differ from machines and puppets. If we merely carried out
orders, we would not be human, we would not be humane.
References:
Hayman, Ronald; "Tom Stoppard" London: 1982, Heinemann
Marowitz, Charles; "Writer in our Midst" in Contemporary Literary
Criticism (ed. Carolyn Riley), vol.1, p 327, Detroit MI:
1973, Gale Research Company
Ranly, Ernest W., "What are people for?" in Contemporary Literary
Criticism (ed. Carolyn Riley and Barbara Harte), vol.2, pp
453-4, Detroit MI: 1974, Gale Research Company
Stoppard, Tom; Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead
Vonnegut, Kurt; Slaughterhouse-Five, or Children's Crusade New
York: 1973, Dell Publishing Company
Weales, Gerald; "To Be And Not to Be" in Contemporary Literary
Criticism (ed. Carolyn Riley), vol.1, pp 327-8, Detroit MI:
1973, Gale Research Company
Go back to
Last modified: March 11, 2002