As the indifferent children of the earth

Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are two of the most underdeveloped characters in literature. This is surprising because they come from Shakespeare's Hamlet, one of the world's most widely recognized literary works. In Hamlet, the two are little more than plot devices, schoolmates of Prince Hamlet summoned by King Claudius to spy on him and discover why he is behaving so strangely.

For those unfamiliar with the story, Claudius was Hamlet's uncle, who married Gertrude (Hamlet's mother) soon after the King (Hamlet's father and Claudius's brother) died under mysterious circumstances. It is revealed that Claudius was the one who killed Hamlet's father so he could get with Gertrude. In those days, marriage to the brother of one's deceased husband was considered incest by the Church. Not to mention, all of this was revealed to Hamlet by the King's own ghost. No wonder Hamlet was a little upset. Talk about drama.

Back to Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. Claudius and Gertrude summon the old school chums to figure out what's up with Hamlet. They do some talking, blah, blah, plot skip and later they are ordered to escort Hamlet from the kingdom and to his execution. Hamlet discovers the plot and escapes it by engineering the death of the duo instead. Bluntly we hear later from an ambassador;

"That Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are dead."

Almost no character development of the two throughout the story. In fact, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are referred to interchangeably with no distinction of who's who. They're also, always, the two/one, much like Lenny and Carl from the Simpsons. It's always Lenny and Carl, and it's always Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, inseparable.

Let me back track to where Hamlet first sees Rosencrantz and Guildenstern because it shows what seems to be a deliberate downplay of the characters — almost as if Shakespeare is saying: Don't care about these two. They're just here for plot.

When they first meet, Hamlet asks how they're doing, to which one replies (it doesn't matter which as they are interchangeable):

"As the indifferent children of the earth."

The other says:

"Happy, in that we are not over-happy;
On fortune's cap we are not the very button."

Hamlet: "Nor the soles of her shoe?"

Rosencrantz or Guildenstern: "Neither, my lord."

When asked how they're doing they reply, eh, so-so. We're happy that we're not too happy. We're indifferent. Not the top of the cap nor the sole of the shoes. Shakespeare is pretty much saying, let me skip over these guys and get to the good part.

Speaking of which, the next part I'd be remiss as a guy if I left it out, though it really has nothing to do with what I'm talking about. If it's not the cap, nor the shoes, it's...

"Then you live about her waist, or in the middle of her favours?" asks Hamlet.

"'Faith, her privates we," says Rosencrantz or Guildenstern.

Faith, her privates we. Nice.

Back to the point. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are minor characters in one of the most recognized stories ever. You can't tell one from the other, and because they were never actually developed as characters, you can't even describe them beyond "schoolmate".

So why am I mentioning them? Good question. I'll come back to that later.

The colours red, blue and green are real. The colour yellow is a mystical experience shared by everybody. Discuss.

- Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead, Tom Stoppard