50 (!!!) consecutive days of hitting post limit

Mia/Link/Majora/Rolf (give it up for rolf and his 14 def everybody. more def than IKE) ~ 23 ~ Any Pronouns (he/it esp i think) ~ Aromantic ~ Lesboy ~ Multi Fandom ~ if it seems like im taking a long time to reblog im probably at post limit again ~ pfp credit: @lin-of-the-linkverse ~ post limit counter updated as of 36st june 2026

[reckless-libertine]

Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead (1990)

Tell me why I can’t stop thinking about them

[godmodebeginswithlesbians]

not to be a polonius apologizer but he was right, beautified is a vile word. kinda makes me wanna puke every time i see it tbh

[olderthannetfic]

A general question for the front porch: How many canons with prominent canon trans men do you know of?

This isn't a request for recs, I'm just curious of what's out there since I don't see these characters very often. Off the top of my head I only know of Boys Run The Riot, the Boyfriends webtoon, Umbrella Academy and Dead End: Paranormal Park.

--

Are we counting Sad Queer Movies or just things one would actually like fandom for? The most relevant thing that occurs to me is Jordan L Hawk's latest series, OutFoxing the Paranormal. It's a little toothless and fluffy for me, to be honest, but it's a decent mystery series with ghosts and a trans lead. I've run across a scattering of other trans guy leads in the indie m/m novel space.

[olderthannetfic]

I have reached new levels of loathing for the phrase "grow a thicker skin" and by now consider it a blockable offense. I get where people are coming from but I also think these same people don't really understand that they might have had an easier time growing one than others.

--

It ought to show up in situations like "Please manage your own emotions instead of expecting internet randos to do it for you" where it's probably very difficult and probably for valid reasons, but that isn't anyone else's problem.

In practice, it usually shows up like "I should be allowed to say mean things to you and not get any reaction I don't like".

[olderthannetfic]

someone in my dash really loves the gay hockey show and as someone not in the fandom who thought it was just fine, I often read their posts and reblogs out of morbid curiosity

and I know it was a lot of people First Gay Fandom but I didn't expect it to be so many people's First Non Anglophone Character ever?

like I understand they want to be considerate of someone struggling with English not being their native languages and it's not their fault the show is also weird about the guy being Russian

but. guys. that Russian guy has now been working and living and sucking and fucking in an Anglophone country for ten years. he's not an immigrant staying in his close tight knit community who only deals with the locals for work and bureaucracy, he's literally The Only Russian

I promise you that you don't need to baby him about how it's soo hard to be woken up in the middle of the night and have someone speak English at you or how it's sooo difficult for him to understand people speaking fast in English

as a fellow immigrant who now has to speak English all the time for fun and profit, I can promise you we can hold two whole languages in our head. maybe even more.

--

*dying*

I've seen half an episode. He was yelling an inspirational speech in perfect English at high speed.

This is a rich, important dude who can afford a good tutor to stand by for his .3 seconds of down time if he needs one. Hell, if his rich-ass dad had the right specific ambitions for him, he probably had a good tutor long before he ever came to the anglophone world.

TBH, when I've seen people struggle and struggle and struggle, it's usually because they lack time or money to study. Occasionally, it's because they theoretically want to study but don't have a pressing need for that language outside of the far future, and they're shy or embarrassed about fucking up language in public. Mr. shouty team captain does not strike me as particularly shy and retiring.

[arcandoria-archived]

crossposting from bsky - glad I stopped using spotify when I did and that I unlinked it from my discord, but still

[ reddit thread | bsky post ]

[carby]

Everything after (and including!) the question mark is the identifier. Destroy it!

[screenshotsofdespair]

[jessebloom]

rosencrantz and guildenstern are dead is literally that tumblr post that goes “i tell you the name of god. you forget. i tell you again. i will tell you as many times as you need to hear it. i will love you for as long as you need me to.”

[jessebloom]

[no-where-new-hero]

Visit Original Link

not to be continually insane about this play or anything, but the radio adaptation gives us an extra initial scene at the beginning when Ros and Guil are summoned to the castle, and apparently Ros and Guil just live together?? Casually?? So that they’re woken up together in the same room??

Tom Stoppard WHAT are you trying to tell us

[leona-florianova]

When you are waiting for Godot, but Rosencrantz and Guildenstern arrive instead.

[manyfandomsonelog]

YOU DON’T EVEN GET TO SEE THEIR DEATHS. THE MOMENT THEIR ROLES IN THE NARRATIVE ARE OVER THEY JUST DISAPPEAR. GUIL DOESN’T EVEN GET TO FINISH HIS LINE. AND THEN IT SWITCHES TO HAMLET. BECAUSE THEY WERE NEVER IMPORTANT. THIS WAS NEVER ABOUT THEM.

[crystallizedtwilight]

Gil and Rose 

[lepetitpoete]

We're tragedians, you see. We follow directions – there is no choice involved. The bad end unhappily, the good unluckily. That is what tragedy means.

[princesshamlet-deactivated20210]

Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead: The Musical, written like Disney’s Enchanted where everyone keeps bursting into song and Ros and Guil have no idea about the music, choreography, or generally what’s going on.

the lion king 1.5

[princesshamlet-deactivated20210]

Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead: The Musical, written like Disney’s Enchanted where everyone keeps bursting into song and Ros and Guil have no idea about the music, choreography, or generally what’s going on.

the lion king 1.5

[gildedstern]

Ok so in Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead Guildenstern says “We’ll know better next time” in regards of finding the point where they can say “No” and save themselves. Similarly, in Waiting For Godot, Gogo and Didi mention that they’ll bring a rope to hang themselves with tomorrow, but they never do. Since we know Rosencrantz is based on Godot, we can assume that our protagonists’ one chance at initiative are equally futile in both plays.

This represents an unavoidable inactivity which can be contrasted with Hamlet’s chosen inactivity, which ultimately leads to the unnecessary deaths of everyone he knows, instead of just his uncle’s. But Rosencrantz places the blame of every character’s actions, or inactions, on the fact that they are simply characters, doing what the script requires. Like the Player says, “There’s a design at work in all art”. Through this ethos, Stoppard is much kinder to Shakespeare’s characters than Shakespeare is. He recognizes their helplessness. When taking this into account with the fact that Rosencrantz and Guildenstern represent everyone on this earth, Stoppard is much kinder to humanity than Shakespeare. In writing “We’ll know better next time” Stoppard acknowledges the helplessness that can fill one’s life but also the beauty of trying.

[webster-wannabe]

Ok I love this! I’m gonna add my thoughts because I have spent an unhealthy amount of time thinking about this play.

When Guildenstern says ‘We’ll know better next time’, he is making an incorrect statement because ‘next time’ (next performance) exactly the same thing will happen because they are following the same script. Stoppard uses dramatic irony to highlight how even when one feels like they have control over their life, the pure absurdness of the universe means that this is not possible. The fourth wall break as Guildenstern seems to be aware that there will be a ‘next time’ involves the audience, reminding them that they too will suffer the same fate as Rosencrantz and Guildenstern- a struggle to comprehend the world they inhabit and an undramatic and inconsequential death. After all, the whole message of the play is that more often than not, we are the insignificant side characters, the Rosencrantz and Guildensterns, not the tragic heroes.

Although Guildenstern can be interpreted as the ‘smart’ one because of his philosophical musings and constant application of logic throughout the play, it is actually Rosencrantz who is correct about their deaths, stating ‘They had it in for us, didn’t they? Right from the beginning’. The play follows both its own script and the plot of Hamlet so they were marked for death ‘right from the beginning’ and no matter how hard they try, they can never possibly ‘know better next time’ because the script dictates that they will always miss the ‘moment at the beginning where [they] could have said no’.

This may seem like a bleak and hopeless message, implying that we have no free will and that we are all doomed to die in obscurity, however look at the character who is right- Rosencrantz. Guildenstern appears foolish, thinking that he can change what is already written but Rosencrantz is for once the one who knows what he is talking about. He is also the more easy going and accepting of the two. He is ‘nice’ and does not get too panicked about constantly trying to grasp his situation, unlike Guildenstern. Rosencrantz wins all of the games that they play- the coin toss and questions. He gets more enjoyment out of life than Guildenstern. Stoppard highlights the importance of not succumbing to the big unanswered questions, but embracing the beautifu yetl meaningless absurdity of our universe.

That’s my take on it anyway…

[gildedstern]

Alright I have to add something because You’re Right.

I always think about Guildenstern talking about his love of boats, since “One is free on them, for a time”. This directly parallels the overarching theme of embracing absurdity. To try and control where a boat is going when you’re not the captain would be absurd, so you there’s no point in worrying about where you’re going. To relax would be perfectly reasonable. But when Guildenstern finds himself on a track headed for death, all he does is worry about it. The first thing he says is “It must be indicative of something” he’s searching for meaning from the very beginning.

In a way, this makes Guildenstern a bit of a hypocrite. But that’s okay, because Guildenstern doesn’t need to be our well defined hero, he can have a bit of overlap with his fellow side characters. Stoppard treats his characters with a kindness that reflects his attitude towards life: everything is so absurd that there’s no point in being cruel to those who have brought suffering upon themselves and we should focus on making ourselves and others feel better.

[webster-wannabe]

Oh no I feel like I will never have enough to say about this play. I really need to exercise some self control…

To expand on your point, I find it note worthy that Guildenstern is always caught up in searching for meaning, but Rosencrantz seems to have found at least some sort of a purpose or formula: ‘be happy- if you’re not even happy what’s so good about surviving?’. To me, this sums up the whole message of the play- in an absurd world, happiness and kindness is all that truly matters. Searching for meaning is futile because meaning can never be found, but we can all practise a little kindness and positivity in order to make such an absurd existence bearable.

Stoppard has described his interpretation of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern as ‘two sides of one temperament’. Rosencrantz embodies the part that is content and Guildenstern embodies the part that craves more. Guildenstern’s path is one of caution, as his pursuit of knowledge reflects poorly upon his character- deciding to seal the letter back up, making Rosencrantz cry and ultimately making an attempt to take the Player’s life. His anxious disposition that is brought on by him realising that he cannot control his life results in him hurting those around him. Since Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are both of ‘one temperament’, there is some fluidity between the two. Rosencrantz also has moments where he tries to attribute meaning to things, notably the ‘shadow play about the nature of ambition’, however this too ends badly as Hamlet ‘murdered’ them intellectually. Since Rosencrantz does not get caught up in trying to find meaning in a meaningless world, he is able to practise kindness and make sure that he and those around him are happy. Guildenstern, however, loses that key concept as his attempts to explain everything usurp his ability to be kind to both himself and others. Although it is human nature to want to satisfy the part of us that craves more answers than we already have, Stoppard seems to argue that it should be ignored: ‘there were always questions. To exchange one set for another is no great matter.’ Since every answer will just lead to more questions it is not worth pursuing these things at the expense of your kindness and the happiness of those you love.

Ok I’m done now

[vivienlacroix]

Alright, I haven’t put so much thought into this play yet but one thing I want to add is that a lot of people get desperate when finding out that there isn’t any sense (already given) in life but since logic is a common weapon for humans, Guildenstern uses it to defend himself from desperation while Rosencrantz just is okay with life being absurd. There are like two sides of the same coin here (sorry, there probably more than two sides) one: if my life makes no difference, I don’t have to live at all (the thing, Guildenstern refuses to realise, defending himself with logic) and two: if my life makes no difference, I can also stay here because if it doesn’t matter wether I’m here or not, I can stay just as well. Because even if the existence is absurd, what’s so bad about it - you can still be emotionally happy nevertheless (Rosencrantz view since he values life just for being and not for any purpose it supposedly holds e.g. “life in a box is better than no life at all”).

In my eyes, Stoppard offers a way to live happily even though you experience that your existence is absurd and that’s a really nice thing he’s doing, since it shows you the second side of the coin, of which you may have not thought about yet.

Regarding Godot and the rope-scene, I think what it wants to say is ‘if we have no success tomorrow with meeting Godot (aka finding the sense of life) we will kill ourself’ but they forget about it again, the plan fading from their consciousness, since no one is able to live with the constant knowledge that their existence is absurd. Of course one may know it, but it’s only conscious occasionally (as most things are).

I want to state that the rope-bringing is similar in showing initiative to “next time we’ll know better” but the important difference is that Vladimir and Estragon want to kill themselves when Godot isn’t coming while Rosencrantz and Guildenstern want to avoid their deaths in the end of the play, just not getting caught up in Hamlets business but instead living a Rosencrantz-like content absurd life.

Alright, that last part was really unnecessary. Sorry if I made any mistakes.

[hyenateeth]

have i ever mentioned how much it hurts me in the RaGAD movie how as they’re about to be hanged Guildenstern closes his eyes, and Rosencrantz sees what he is doing and just blithely follows his example

do you know how much that hurts me

[all-mimsy]

 #HE TOLD HIM THAT HE WOULD SEE THAT THEY WERE ALL RIGHT HE TOLD HIM THAT HE WOULD SEE THAT THEY WERE ALL RIGHT #ROSENCRANTZ AND GUILDENSTERN ARE DEAD #LAYS ON THE FLOOR CRYING

that post

those tags

what gave you the right

*runs away sobbing*