Samuel Beckett’s Waiting For Godot and The Theater of The Absurd

Theatre is a complex art that attempts to weave stories of varying degrees of intricacies with the hope that feelings will be elicited from the audience. Samuel Beckett’s most famous work in the theatre world, however, is Waiting for Godot, the play in which, according to well-known Irish critic Vivian Mercier, “nothing happens, twice.” Beckett pioneered many different levels of groundbreaking and avant-garde theatre and had a large influence on the section of the modern idea of presentational theatre as opposed to the representational. His career seemingly marks the end of modernism in theatre and the creation of what is known as the “Theatre of the Absurd.”

The Theatre of the Absurd is the name for particular plays of absurdist fiction written by a number of primarily European playwrights in the late 1950s, as well as one for the style of theatre which has evolved from their work. Their work expressed what happens when human existence has no meaning or purpose and therefore all communication breaks down, alerting their audiences to pursue the opposite. The Absurd in these plays takes the form of man’s reaction to a world apparently without meaning, and/or man as a puppet controlled or menaced by invisible outside forces. Theatre of the Absurd consisted of horrific or tragic images; characters caught in

     Samuel Beckett was forty-two years old and living in post-war Paris when he wrote Waiting for Godot as an exercise to help rid himself of the writer's block which was hindering his work in fiction. Once he started, he became increasingly absorbed in the play, and scribbled it almost without hesitation into a soft-cover notebook in a creative burst that lasted from October 9, 1948, until he completed the typed manuscript on January 29, 1949. After some revision, he offered the script to several producers, but it was refused. Although Beckett himself gave up hope with the script, his wife was more persistent, and, acting as his agent, she continued to approach

First of all, the pair live a cyclical lifestyle consisting of various unnecessary and repetitive habits. Clearly, Vladimir is referred to as “Didi”; similarly, “Gogo” is a nickname for Estragon. In fact, the aforementioned nicknames are symbolic as they support Beckett’s stress on repetition. To illustrate, “Didi” is a simply a restatement of the syllable “di” while “go” is reiterated to form “Gogo”. Noticeably, the entirety of Beckett’s play revolves around a basic circular structure that begins with Estragon and Vladimir attempting to relieve themselves by alleviating their boredom, only to be interrupted by the arrival of unexpected guests who, eventually, leave the duo alone until they are met with other individuals. Furthermore, both

Waiting for Godot, Samuel Beckett's existential masterpiece, for some odd reason has captured the minds of millions of readers, artists, and critics worldwide, joining them all in an attempt to interpret the play. Beckett has told them not to read anything into his work, yet he does not stop them. Perhaps he recognizes the human quality of bringing personal experiences and such to the piece of art, and interpreting it through such colored lenses. Hundreds of theories are expounded, all of them right and none of them wrong. A play is only what you bring to it, in a subconscious connection between you and the playwright.

In contrast, Estragon is concerned mainly with more mundane matters: He prefers a carrot to a radish or turnip, his feet hurt, and he blames his boots; he constantly wants to leave, and it must be drilled into him that he must wait for Godot.. He is willing to beg for money from a stranger (Pozzo), and he eats Pozzo's discarded chicken bones with no shame. He also has a poor memory, as

Modernist fiction is incredibly dense and abstract. Writers from the twentieth century also seem to carry with them the weight of the world, and thus their fiction has been filled with realistic misery and pain. Still, these writers often add to this element with existentialist thematic structures, which construct a very unique and experimental viewpoint on a modern existence. This is what is occurring in both Samuel Beckett's Waiting for Godot as well as Albert Camus' The Stranger. The two a very different in format, yet both play upon the modernist idea of abandonment by God and the idea that there is an underlying sense of nothingness that guides modern life. Each focuses on the notion of free will and how it determines our lives in a world devoid of God. Together, these great works of contemporary fiction are a telling testament to the changing nature of sentiments regarding both religion and the meaning of life in a tumultuous twentieth century paradigm.

Beckett draws the structure of the play in a way that suits his unconventional themes and characterization. Though Waiting for Godot is criticized as being a formless play, its circular structure adds to the meaning of the play and its absurdity. The plot is circular with hardly any development of action; no beginning, climax or end. This view of structure is held in John Fletcher and John Spurling’s book, Beckett, A Study of His Plays

Here we have a tendency to see that Vladimir is looking on Godot to inform him what he must apprehend relating to his existence; whereas Estragon asserts that they are doing not have the time to attend which they ought to take action on their own before it 's too late. The trope of the cooling iron suggests that humanity doesn 't have enough time to attend for his or her non secular ponderings to supply them enlightenment, that the prospect can pass, and their efforts won 't go once it will. Therefore, it is finished from this that Estragon’s suggestion that he and Vladimir build their own manner currently, before it 's too late is that the additional ideal course of action advocated by the play. It’s Estragon World Health Organization follows

The whole play, including all the actions and the theme itself, is affected by the mention of Godot. Vladimir and Estragon spend the entire play waiting for this unknown being. Vladimir and Estragon are not even sure if they are at the right place or time for their meeting. They do not even know why they are waiting for Godot. The two homeless men never express any understanding about the reason for the meeting with the unknown man. Both the characters and the audience see Godot as a savior of some sort. He is the one who will bring salvation. He could be a Christ figure or another religious figure. Godot may also be a representation of salvation; this may or may not be a religious rescue. Godot may also be symbolic of the meaning of life that Vladimir and Estragon are searching for. . He is a reason they are still alive. Every day, Estragon wants to kill himself, but not only is there not enough rope, but there is also a hope that maybe, just maybe, Godot will appear the next day and everything will be different. Interestingly enough, Godot is also the one who keeps two friends coming back to the same spot, instead of wandering off and looking for a better place to live. Because of the endless promise that this one person will actually come, they do not leave the place. The character of Godot may be an interpretation of death since that would bring an answer to the questions that the two men are searching and

Furthermore, Basaninyenzi writes a fairly common claim. He says, “Godot, as many critics maintain, is a diminutive of God. He is a supremely powerful being, for it is he who holds in his hand the future of mankind – Vladmir and Estragon (Basaninyenzi 70).” Godot is an entity who is ever-present, but is never explicitly there and yet controls the entire movement – or lack thereof – in the show stands directly parallel to God as a spiritual entity. Basaninyenzi believes that based on these two similarities that Waiting for Godot is an inherently anti-Christian text.

Waiting for Godot is the most influential work of the XX century. Although Samuel Beckett, its author, did not want it to be interpreted, readers started to interpret it and nowadays the interpretations are endless. In this brief essay I focus my attention on two topics: the role of stage directions in the play and in some aspects of the characterization of the few people that intervene in it.

If hope does not exist, Vladimir and Estragon will never fulfill their desires. Throughout the boy’s appearance, Vladimir continues to interrogate him, asking him several questions about the mysterious figure that is Godot. Asking the boy about Godot, Vladimir asks, “What does he do, Mr. Godot? Do you hear me?” (106), to which the boy merely replies as “He does nothing, Sir” (106). Thus, the futile nature of hope is depicted through Beckett’s use of symbolism. As Godot symbolizes hope, and the boy stated that “He (Godot) does nothing...” (106), this hints the redundant existence of hope. Rather, it is merely something individuals rely on to keep living, as for the case of Vladimir and Estragon, who continuously wait for Godot. While they contemplate suicide many times throughout the book, it is their motivation and continuous strive to wait for Godot that keeps them living to the next day. While “Godot” has failed Vladimir and Estragon many times, failing to show up to the exact spot that they believed they would meet him, they keep on waiting. Their strive and motivation is depicted as Vladimir says, “Tell him... Tell him you saw me and that... That you saw me. You’re sure you saw me, you won’t come and tell me to-morrow that you never saw me!”

In Waiting for Godot, Beckett often focused on the idea of "the suffering of being." Most of the play deals with the fact that Estragon and Vladimir are waiting for something to relieve them from their boredom. Godot can be understood as one of the many things in life that people wait for. Waiting for Godot is part of the ‘Theater of the Absurd’. This implies that it is meant to be irrational and meaningless. Absurd theater does not have the concepts of drama, chronological plot, logical language, themes, and recognizable settings. There is also a split between the intellect and the body within the work. Vladimir represents the intellect and Estragon the body, both cannot exist without the other.

In fact, in producing the completely obvious allusion, Beckett beckons the interpreter to follow a path of religious symbolism. Throughout the play, references to Christianity are so often mentioned that one can scarcely identify a religious undercurrent; the presence of religion is not really below the surface. In the opening moments of the play, Vladimir asks "Hope deferred make something sick, who said that?" (8A). The real quotation, "Hope deferred maketh the heart sick," comes from Proverbs 13:12 of the Bible. Shortly after, Vladimir asks if Estragon has ever read the Bible and continues on a discussion of the Gospels, the "Saviour," and the two thieves surrounding Christ during the crucifixion (8B-9B). By inserting religious discussions in the first few moments play, the playwright encourages the interpreter to assume the play's themes are greatly connected with religion. Then, when the discussion turns to Godot, Estragon associates their request from Godot with "A kind of prayer" (13A). The connection between God and Godot is seemingly firmly established, leaving room for a variety of interpretations. Vladimir and Estragon are the faithful adherents to God, and wait for Him, or a messianic figure, to come. Perhaps Vladimir and Estragon are representatives of hope by demonstrating unwavering faith to a God who does not present himself or, on the other hand, are showing the