Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are FINALLY dead!!!

      It only took the entire play for the story to fit the title. As entertaining as it was, I have to admit I am a bit relieved that it is over.  However, there were a lot of interesting parts in this section.  While on the boat, Ros says, " We don't question, we don't doubt.  We perform" (108).  The "are we actors" concept is brought up again.  The truth is that Rosie and Guil just have no control over what happens to them.  They are subject to what has already happened in Hamlet.  Another section where this is addressed is on page 101, where Guil says that they are "free to move, speak,extemporise,and yet. We have not been cut loose... We may seize the moment ... but we are brought around full circle..."  It sounds like he is calling himself a puppet.  I think it would be pretty awful to feel like someone was controlling your every move.  It only proves that Rosie and Guil have no power to create their own story.  They are just acting out what has already been planned for them.  Then, an example of technoculture is shown when they are talking about the letter from the king.  Ros then says, "So we've got a letter which explains everything."  Other characters' testimonies are not reliable.  The only proof of their existence and previous lives would be a letter or a written down piece of evidence.  

      Also, I have to say that the barrel scene was hilarious.  I actually laughed out loud when I pictured them popping out at the same time just staring at each other.  And, I finally caught a gay joke.  On page 100, they talk about stretching each other's legs, but Guil says no because "somebody might come in." I think that the comedy in this play is necessary so that it keeps the reader from being mad at all the confusion going on.  So my last bit of confusion was the actual deaths of Rosie and Guil.  They disappeared.  It was just a very strange, unsettling way to end the lives of these characters.  To be honest, as many headaches as they caused me, I think I will miss Rosie and Guil.

THENDYWAMPS?

        So I am supposed to decide who the winner is.  Well, I think that is a bit of a ridiculous question when you consider the fact that nothing means anything and nothing can help you win.  You would think that the winner would be the one with the most monopoly money (Heads) or the one with the best rules (Tales), but what are rules? Rules have no meaning. Points have no meaning.  Even the judge who acts like God has no real power.  Who is the judge to decide what rules are good or which answer is better than another?  If this game is truly postmodern, there is no one in control.  Plus, if the questions and answers mean nothing, what is the point of having them? So who did win? How would someone go about deciding that?  Maybe we should just flip a coin.  Well,  I suppose the answer is nobody won.  It is impossible to win at a game where nothing counts for anything or everything counts for nothing.  The problem is though, that I won or shall I say the Tales team won.  Truth is up to the individual, and since I am not a huge fan of losing, my truth is that my team won. 

Ros and Guil are definitely not dead!

Like I have said before, this story is extremely odd. However, I keep laughing at the characters because they are just so clueless. I think that the strangest aspect of Act 2 has been all of the references to existentialism. It just seems so depressing and pathetic to think of ours lives meaning nothing when there is no one to tell us we exist. On page 63, when the player says that the "single assumption which makes our existence viable" is "that somebody is watching." It just seems so sad to think that people do not really exist without someone verifying that existence. Then, when Rosencrantz talks about the box idea, he is pretty much saying that without actions or relationships, it is like we are laying in a box waiting to die. That just seems so strange that we mean nothing without other people. We are nobody until we know someone else.
Also, I think it is really interesting that some Christian ideas are brought up in this act. Rosencrantz's idea of wanting a "beginning, middle, and end" to a story is the same as Christianity. We all want a beginning, middle, and end. Also, Rosencrantz says that "we have no control. None at all..." (71). This is another Christian idea. We as God's created people have no control. He is the only one with control over our lives. However, in the case of Ros and Guil, they have no control over what goes on in the play. They just follow what was already written for them. The strangest part about this is that they seem to know what to do without being told. This is shown when they just know that they are going to take Hamlet to England, but the king has not given them orders. They just know because it is part of the play. So although this story seems like the most confusing, strange thing I have ever read, it is really interesting to see all the different ideas and concepts shown by Ros and Guil.