Waiting for Godot - Samuel Beckett

...Beckett's most popular absurdist play, Waiting For Godot, is one of the first examples critics point to when talking about the Theatre of the Absurd. This is perhaps because it follows the simple rules of having no real story line but instead having a series of "free floating images" I.e. the tree, focusing on the incomprehensibility of the world or an attempt to rationalize an irrational, disorderly world and having language act as a barrier ...
...nihilistic.

Waiting for Godot, written and first performed in French in 1954, had an enormous impact on theatregoers due to its strange and new conventions. Consisting of an essentially barren set, with the exception of a virtually leafless tree, clown-like tramps, and highly symbolic language, Godot challenges its audience to question all of the old rules and to try to make sense of a world that is beyond our understanding. At the ... more

*Original Thoughts*

Admittedly, when I was first told we were to study this play in drama, I was a little apprehensive. I had loosely heard of Beckett - his works being associated with little action and long synonymous dialect. Obviously not something that appealed to me… and I was right, this play was dull, strange and bore little impact onto my life.

At least, that's what I thought.

As I began to read the pages, I began to discover the fine art of Beckett's work, something which I found appealing and strangely hypnotic - words I don't usually associate with simply just reading a play. It is for this reason, I will try and share with you an account of what I think to be one of the best ever written plays.

I ask to please bear with me, whilst some of the rhetoric may seem disjointed, I feel it to be entirely appropriate for the review.

*The Background*

At the time of writing "Waiting for Godot", there was no other similar type of play in the world of theatre. It is perhaps best described as being from "The Theatre of the Absurd", the expression invented by the critic Martin Esslin for the work of a number of playwrights, mostly written in the 1950s and 1960s. The term is derived from the French philosopher Albert Camus where he first defined the human situation as, in its simplest form, meaningless and absurd. The 'absurd' plays by Samuel Beckett and others such as Arthur Adamov, Tom Stoppard, Edward Bond, Jean Genet, Harold Pinter, all share the view that man is inhabiting a universe with which he is out of key. Its meaning is mysterious and his place within it is without purpose. He is bewildered, troubled and obscurely threatened.

Beckett's most popular absurdist play, Waiting For Godot, is one of the first examples critics point to when talking about the Theatre of the Absurd. This is perhaps because it follows the simple rules of having no real story line but instead having a series of "free floating images" I.e. the tree, focusing on the incomprehensibility of the world or an attempt to rationalize an irrational, disorderly world and having language act as a barrier to communication, which in turn isolates the individual even more, thus making speech almost futile. In other words, absurdist drama creates an environment where people are isolated, clown-like characters blundering their way through life because they don't know what else to do. Often, characters (such as Vladimir and Estragon) stay together simply because they are afraid to be alone in such an incomprehensible world. Despite this negativity, however, absurdism is not completely nihilistic.

Waiting for Godot, written and first performed in French in 1954, had an enormous impact on theatregoers due to its strange and new conventions. Consisting of an essentially barren set, with the exception of a virtually leafless tree, clown-like tramps, and highly symbolic language, Godot challenges its audience to question all of the old rules and to try to make sense of a world that is beyond our understanding. At the heart of the play is the theme of "coping" and "getting through the day" so that when tomorrow comes we can have the strength to continue. However, as made clear by the director of the English premiere of Godot, Peter Hall, this play was not immediately recognised as either groundbreaking, or more simply, even a good play. In fact, at one stage Hall was told to close the play due to its poor reviews. Yet this was only short lived, as soon people began to see Godot for what it really was and following the words of " The Sunday Times" critic Hobson, "Godot mania gripped London" (Hall).

*So, what's it all about?*

Structurally, Godot is a two-act play which is primarily cyclical. It begins with two lonely tramps on a roadside who are awaiting the arrival of a figure referred to as Godot and ends with the same idea. Many critics have concluded that Act Two is simply a repeat of Act One. In other words, Vladimir and Estragon carry out the same procedure day in and day out and may forever be "waiting for Godot." This is an entirely understandable school of thought as the audience are never given an answer to their predicament. As an audience, we can only watch them do the same things, listen to them say the same things, and accept the fact that Godot may or may not come. Much like them, we are stuck in a world where our actions dictate our survival. We may search for an answer or a meaning to our existence, but we most likely will never find it. Anthony Jenkins writes, "there can be no answers; Godot may or may not exist and may or may not arrive; we know no more about him than do Vladimir and Estragon"(40). Thus, this play is structurally arranged in such a way as to make us believe that Godot will probably never come, and that we must accept the uncertainty of life.

The essence of the play is built around the two main characters Vladimir and Estragon. Their conversation lends itself to broken dialogue, interrupted by long pauses and moments of silence. However, with the entrance and exit of the other characters, this style is broken. The best example and most prominent example of this is Lucky's speech. The significance of this is that it is a continuous section of prose, using no grammar to break it up. Whilst Lucky's thoughts are not entirely random, as he was told to think by Pozzo, the nature of it reveals nothing about his character and also his thoughts are "unfinished". Initially, the speech seems rather disjointed in comparison to the rest of the play but on closer reflection, it is perhaps the opposite.

The choice of characters is unsurprising given the context of the play. Beckett wanted the audience to appreciate the play for the text as opposed to the action; therefore he wanted the characters to be of the simplest form of life. This way the audience is indifferent to them, bearing relatively little resemblance to their lives but, in some way can connect to them on a different level. For example, many can relate to the idea of boredom, loneliness and waiting. As characters, however, they are the prototypical absurdist figures who essentially lack identities and their vaudeville mannerisms, particularly when it comes to contemplating their suicides, has a more comic effect on the audience than a tragic one. This is perhaps best observed in the beginning scene of the play when they contemplate hanging themselves.

Beckett's play has spun a careful web of symbolism that substitutes for a conventional plot, allowing the audience to see a series of epiphanies related to the nature of experience itself. These poetic images and the flashes of consciousness they induce resemble the "total experience" or "feeling of wholeness" that results from the "polyphonic montage" in the film theory of Sergei Eisenstein (Andrew 61-63). Using the tree and the mound as an example, it has been argued that the fundamental imagery of the play is Christian. (Where the tree reflects the Tree of Knowledge and the Cross.). It has also been suggested that the two tramps are indeed the two thieves that were crucified at the same time as Jesus, that they talk about in the beginning of the play. However, at no point during the play are these insinuates confirmed.
There is also a somewhat assumed link that Godot is God though this unfounded - as Beckett once said, 'If I had wanted it to be God, why would I have called it Godot?'

There has also been suggestions that they play has mythical representations. For example, some have thought that Vladimir and Estragon actually represent one person, and portray a battle of the heart and mind or rather the subconscious and conscience of a man. This idea of yin and yang is explained by the two opposing personalities of the two characters, Vladimir who is more sound minded and more of a mature figure in comparison to Estragon who is more passionate and nonsensical in his thoughts. Despite their obvious dissimilarities, when placed together the two even each other out and it is for this reason that although both admitting to being happier apart, they are unable to move.

*How accessible is it?*

The language of the play is not definitive of a particular time period allowing it to be performed to any audience and have it still relate. The themes, ideologies and conflicts surrounding the play are still central to today and have not lost their impact across the years from when this was first written.

Whilst I am able to accept that by studying the play, I have learnt a great deal more - to those who pick it up for the first time, it should still have some sort of impact on the reader. I would however advise that the reader sees it in action - To me, so much is brought through the acting that it simply cannot be dismissed.

*How much is it?*

I bought my own copy from a local bookstore at around £7.99 - a price I know that can be beaten by other competitors such as Ottakers, David's Bookstore or Waterstones. Online it can be bought from buy.com at $8.88 (though shipping costs might increase that price); Amazon.co.uk, used & New from £5.00; Play.com from £6.49 and ebay.co.uk from around £1.

*From the Author*

In summary, the words of Beckett perhaps best describe the inaction in Godot;
"There are those who can only find satisfaction visually. As far as I'm concerned , and doubtless this is my misfortune , I can only escape with my eyelids closed ."

Hope this help : ) 

...less