Rosencrantz And Guildenstern Controversy

There is controversy as to rather or not Rosencrantz and Guildenstern deserved their fate. Despite what these two did to Hamlet, their death was not necessary. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern were blindly following the king’s orders and the king didn’t tell them his true intentions. Overall,it feels as if they had good intentions for Hamlet to recover or to die quickly and possibly find peace because it is possible they have believed he was completely mad.
One part of the controversy is that they did not deserve their horrible fate of death. Though the time period this was based around was more accepting towards the fate of the death of others,Rosencrantz and Guildenstern’s death could have been avoided. Had the communication between King Claudius, Hamlet, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, and even Queen Gertrude, been better many issues could have been resolved before happening.
For instance, if King Claudius were to have completely told Rosencrantz and Guildenstern his scheme for Hamlet’s demise the betrayal could have been avoided, therefore possibly avoiding their deaths. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern hinted around about how they were
Half-men are two characters that make up one character. This can easily be determined Rosencrantz and Guildenstern’s mannerisms, way of speaking, and their behavior. Due to them being considered half-men, the effect the both of them have on Hamlet for the betrayal may be less dramatic than if Rosencrantz and Guildenstern were to be considered completely separate characters. In Hamlet, Rosencrantz calls himself and Guildenstern “little men.”, saying this : “We are little men, we don’t know the ins and outs of the matter, there are wheels within wheels”. This is an interesting analogy because Rosencrantz finally realizes that both himself and Guildenstern went in blindly to work for the king,just to end up being used before their undeserved