Life is not a problem to be solved, but a reality to be experienced.
(Soren Kierkegaard)
Existentialism is a philosophical movement which embraces life with its full meaninglessness and absurdities. Above statement by Soren Kierkegaard who is considered as the first Existentialist prompts the same idea that Life is not a problem, but the problem is in our thinking that we see life as a problem. Life is a journey which can be experienced by living and experiencing every phase of life with full enthusiasm.
After the dreadful realities of the Second World War people started seeing life which is full of emptiness, where nothing to do, nothing to embrace, nothing to live and nothing to experience. As a response to that there is a rise of Existentialism which emphasizes more on Individual Freedom and Choice. It urges human beings to pursue their own choice and create one's individual, unique world in this irrational universe.
One of the unforgettable and noticeable names in Existentialism is Albert Camus who promoted the idea of 'Absurdity of Life within his work name 'The Myth of Sisyphus.
"Man stands face to face with the irrational. He feels within him his longing for happiness and for reason. The absurd is born of this confrontation between the human need and the unreasonable silence of the world."
You may ask why I am talking all this stuff, what is the point of doing this? Well, These itself are some existential questions about which we are going to elaborate in this blog. So, This is the brief introduction of Existentialism before we dive into one of the most weird, mysterious, and open-ended plays by Samuel Beckett named 'Waiting For Godot.'
Waiting For Godot by Samuel Beckett can be categorized under the "Absurd Play" which revolves around the theme of meaninglessness and Nothingness of life.
Nothing happens, Nobody comes, Nobody goes, it's awful!"
The play can be read through various perspectives ranging from Theological point of view to Political Reading, Existential angst to Divine Perspective, similarities with Hindu philosophy to criticism on Christianity.
This blog is written in response to Thinking Activity given by Teacher. Where students have to answer some of the questions which are asked in Teacher's blog with reference to Original Play Reading and Movie Adaption(2001) directed by Michael Lindsay-Hogg and screenplay by Samuel Beckett himself. Role of Vladimir and Estragon are played by Barry McGovern and Johnny Murphy respectively. And Lucky and Pozzo were performed by Alan Standford and Stephen Brennan.
1) What connection do you see in the setting (A country road, A tree, Evening) of the play and these paintings?
It is believed that The setting of the play and the 'Longings' paintings by Casper David Friedrich are quite similar. Infact, Beckett got inspiration for his play from these paintings. But, Still we can draw some differences in the setting of the play and These two paintings by David Casper.
One of the major difference between these two scenes is about the intention of the author. David Casper is fascinated towards Romanticism that's why his imagination ends in this painting by romanticizing nature with its sensitivity. While Beckett's purpose is totally contradictory. Who wants to show the meaninglessness of life through this barren tree.
2) The tree is the only important ‘thing’ in the setting. What is the importance of trees in both acts? Why does Beckett grow a few leaves in Act II on the barren tree - The tree has four or five leaves - ?
As it is said, Beckett got inspiration from 'Longing' painting by Casper David Friedrich for the setting of Waiting for Godot. Setting of the both plays are nearly the same except minor changes in Act 2 where four or five leaves flourished on a tree.
ESTRAGON: What is it?
VLADIMIR: I don't know. A willow.
ESTRAGON: Where are the leaves?
VLADIMIR: It must be dead.
ESTRAGON: No more weeping.
VLADIMIR: Or perhaps it's not the season.
ESTRAGON: Looks to me more like a bush.
VLADIMIR: A shrub.
ESTRAGON: A bush.
If we see the Theological reference of the Tree then it can be said that it is a burning bush where our two major characters are waiting for God to come and give them salvation. Every day they wait for a character named Godot, but he never comes till the moon rises and only his message comes that he surely came tomorrow. So, Flourishment of leaves on the tree on the second day show a kind of hope that today he might come.
3) In both Acts, evening falls into night and moon rises. How would you like to interpret this ‘coming of night and moon’ when actually they are waiting for Godot?
At the end of both acts 'coming of night and Moon rises' show that they used to wait for Godot from Evening to night.
"The light suddenly fails.
In a moment it is night.
The moon rises at back,
mounts in the sky,
stands still, shedding
a pale light on the scene."
(Act 1)
If we connect this situation with feelings or conditions of Estragon and Vladimir then Evening fall into night can be interpreted as shattered hope. Again they are in Darkness because Even today Godot did not come. But the rise of the Moon again gives them a kind of hope that surely he will come tomorrow. Tomorrow is never going to end until death.
4) The director feels the setting with some debris. Can you read any meaning in the contours of debris in the setting of the play?
"A country road. A Tree.
Evening." (Act 1)
"Next day. Same Time.
Same place."(Act 2)
'Waiting for Godot' is an Absurd play which highlights the absurdities of life. And use of Debris in a film which was released in 2001 directed by Michael Lindsay-Hogg shows the meaning. Debris is rubbish kind of waste by using that film maker creatively using his artistic liberty to create Irrationality, Meaninglessness, Nothingness and pointlessness of life.
This play also can be read as a response to the destructive effect of the second world war. And this use of debris in a setting can also be analyzed as a battlefield after war, where now everythings seems useless.
If we see use of debris in setting through nihilistic point of view then it can be examined as Emptiness. It shows pessimism and negativity. And we analyse the same setting through the lenses of existentialism. Then we can say that Estragon and Vladimir are waiting for Godot on this destroyed land shows a kind of hope in a totally meaningless world.
5) The play begins with the dialogue “Nothing to be done”. How does the theme of ‘nothingness’ recurs in the play?
The major thematic concern of the play is Nothingness. If we see the storyline of the play then one can figure out there is not a story as such. But the fragmented and Broken dialogues between two major characters pointed towards the nothingness.
Two essential characters of the play, Estragon and Vladimir, do nothing except waiting for Godot and they are also struggling to find auch meaningful activity to do. But they have nothing to be done and time again after some efforts they seat down with despair. So, This how a theme of nothingness is explored throughout the play. Martin Esslin rightly remarks...
"Waiting for Godot' does not tell a story; it explores a static situation. "Nothing happens, nobody comes, nobody goes, it's awful." On a country road by a tree two tramps, Vladimir and Estragon are waiting." (Martin Esslin)
6) Do you agree: “The play (Waiting for Godot), we agreed, was a positive play, not negative, not pessimistic. As I saw it, with my blood and skin and eyes, the philosophy is: 'No matter what— atom bombs, hydrogen bombs, anything—life goes on. You can kill yourself, but you can't kill life." (E.G. Marshall who played Vladimir in the original Broadway production 1950s)?
Yes, I agree with the above statement that 'Waiting for Godot' is rather a positive play instead of Negative. Of Course it explores the very idea of Absurdity of Life but within those parameters it also focuses on accepting reality. Because Life itself is absurd and we can't run away from that truth. But with the use of 'Waiting' in the title as well as an act of awaited wait for Godot by Vladimir and Estragon emphasis to have a hope in life. As Martin Esslin rightly states...
"The subject of the play is not Godot but waiting, the act of waiting is an essential and characteristic aspect of the human condition."
(Martin Esslin)
Waiting is the prime activity of human beings and while waiting like Estragon and Vladimir we are also stringed with some achievements and goals and desire to come true. So, Waiting is at the center of the play which suggests a kind of positive attitude towards life.
7) How are the props like hat and boots used in the play? What is the symbolic significance of these props?
“The Tragic Pleasure of Waiting for Godot mentions the fact that in a play with few props and no scenery, everything counts”
Waiting for Godot, a masterpiece by Samuel Beckett makes significant use of every thing used in the play. Every single stuff has its own independent and symbolic meaning. Vladimir and Estragon showed time and again as playing with hats and shoes respectively which symbolize the intellectual capability of solving the problem of Vladimir and earthy and realistic nature of Estragon.
Vladimir played with the hat, he put off his hat and again put on, knocked it and said nothing to be done. This can be analyzed as he is searching for some ideas and answers through playing with hat because that is a symbol of knowledge and intellectuality from where thoughts come. But by the time he didn't get any answers and get discouraged. He gives up and unwillingly puts his hat on head again.
"In Waiting for Godot, bowler hats are removed for thinking but replaced for speaking"
(Huge Henner)
So, Hat symbolizes Vladimir's knowledge and in that way he is in a higher position than Estragon. One more interpretation can be given then Vladimir's height also symbolizes his rationality and state of mind which directly pops up with the use of hats.
Estragon, playing with boots, has trouble taking off his boot. Here boots symbolize Estragon's realistic nature instead of rational thinking. He is more near to Earth and Earthly struggle, because boots are struggling him a lot. Beckett's emphasis on these trivial things shows the trivial sufferings of human beings.
"The boots portray the struggle with continuing life that the play presents as well as Estragon’s grounded nature and realistic features."
8) Do you think that the obedience of Lucky is extremely irritating and nauseatic? Even when the master Pozzo is blind, he obediently hands the whip in his hand. Do you think that such a capacity for slavishness is unbelievable?
Yes, I agree with the above statement that the obedience of Lucky is extremely irritating and nauseatic. Because being free is everyone's urge and primitive human desire. But here we see that Lucky is tied with his master and a kind of blind follower who wasn't even able to see that his master is overpowering him.
"It is mental slavery to cling to things that have stopped serving it’s purpose in your life."
(Chinonye J. Chidolue)
Lucky is more knowledgeable and intelligent than his master. He is also seen as a spiritual side of life. But still he didn't even make a single step to set him free, which sometimes became irritating. So, Mentally Lucky is totally blind towards his master. He can be seen as like blind follower of his master without any rational thinking that what damage his master is doing in his independent life.
Even in Act 2 his Master became blind, but still he is fully obedient and honest with his master. This can be analyzed more appropriately if we see psychologically. Lucky's mind is trained in such a way that now he can't even think against his master. So, Rope became a very interesting symbol around which he is tied by his Master which didn't allow him to pursue his freedom.
9) Who according to you is Godot? God? An object of desire? Death? Goal? Success? Or . . .
Godot is an invisible character in the play who didn't appear at all but still the whole play revolved around him in his waiting. The name of Good is uttered almost 48 times (23 in Act 1 and 25 in Act 2) in a play. The play didn't give us a clear cut explanation for what Godot stands for. So, it is open to interpretation in whatever way readers want. We can say Godot can be anything from God to Death, a desirable object in life to death.
In its very title the significance of Godot became very clear. Waiting for Godot, meaning things for which we wait throughout our life.
ESTRAGON: (his mouth full, vacuously). We're not tied?
VLADIMIR: I don't hear a word you're saying.
ESTRAGON: (chews, swallows). I'm asking you if we're tied.
VLADIMIR: Tied?
ESTRAGON: Ti-ed.
VLADIMIR: How do you mean tied?
ESTRAGON: Down.
VLADIMIR: But to whom? By whom?
ESTRAGON: To your man.
VLADIMIR: To Godot. Tied to Godot! What an idea! No question of it! (Pause) For the moment.
From the above conversation it seems Godot represents God with whom Destiny and Fate of Vladimir and Estragon is connected. Another possible interpretation given to the Godot is Godot can be a human desires and wishes of life on which we used to live throughout our life to become a true Godot.
It also symbolizes death for which now Estragon and Vladimir are ceaselessly waiting to come and before that they also have a kind of hope that if we meet Godot then we will be given salvation. As Martin Esslin puts….
"The Waiting for Godot is concerned with the hope and salvation through the workings of grace seems clearly established both from Beckett's own evidence and from the text itself."
10) “The subject of the play is not Godot but ‘Waiting’” (Esslin, A Search for the Self). Do you agree? How can you justify your answer?
Martin Esslin in his essay argues that the 'Waiting' is the central theme of the play instead of Godot because Godot remains unseen throughout the play.
Godot can be seen as an omnipotent figure whose arrival will change Estragon and Vladimir lives. But with that what's more important is their waiting which is going to end after ceaseless waiting. So, For Martin Esslin Godot is a secondary importance and Waiting is at the center.
"The act of waiting as an essential and characteristic aspect of the human condition. Throughout our lives, we always wait for something and Godot simply represents the objective of our wanting - an event, a thing, a person, death."
So, This is how Martin Esslin put waiting at the center in his essay 'The search for the self' as thematic concern.
11) Do you think that plays like this can better be ‘read’ than ‘viewed’ as it requires a lot of thinking on the part of readers, while viewing, the torrent of dialogues does not give ample time and space to ‘think’? Or is it that the audio-visuals help in better understanding of the play?
"Some plays are written to be read
and Some plays are
written to be watched."
If we take the play 'Waiting For Godot' in the center then I agree with the statement that if we read Waiting for Godot then it will increase our understanding more instead of watching. Few reasons behind why we should read Waiting for Godot…
- It explores deep philosophies of life which we can understand through thoroughly reading books because it gives more space to think.
- There are also many hidden references of Christianity which we will know while reading text.
- Cultural, Religious and geographical distance between the place on which it is written and place from where we are reading also create difficulty to understand play deeply while we are watching.
- While watching a film a dialogue comes one by one quickly which doesn't allow the audience to find depth of the play, which only can be possible while we are reading.
So, If we read this kind of play then it widens our horizon. But we can't completely deny the Film. Film version is also as important to see as Camera focus and all. So, we can say before watching play if read play then it would be great help to understand play deeply.
12) Which of the following sequence you liked the most:
- Vladimir – Estragon killing time in questions and conversations while waiting
- Vladimir and Estragon: The Hat and the Boot
- Pozzo – Lucky episode in both acts
- Conversion of Vladimir with the boy
The part which I like the most in the movie is the conversation between Vladimir and the boy at the end of both acts. Because it gives a complete exposure to the character of Vladimir who asked a number of questions to the boy regarding Godot and how Godot treats him and he also tries to know the behavioral and humanistic patterns of Invisible Godot. Which shows Vladimir's quest to search about Godot.
13) Did you feel the effect of existential crisis or meaninglessness of human existence in the irrational and indifference Universe during screening of the movie? Where and when exactly that feeling was felt, if ever it was?
The major concern of the play is Meaninglessness and nothingness of life. We feel existential crises or existential angst of human existence throughout play beginning from settings to endless waiting and meaningless conversation to search for meaning in life.
ESTRAGON: Wait! (He moves away from Vladimir.) I sometimes wonder if we wouldn't have been better off alone, each one for himself. (He crosses the stage and sits down on the mound.) We weren't made for the same road.
VLADIMIR: (without anger). It's not certain.
Estragon: No,Nothing is certain.
(Vladimir slowly crosses the stage and
sits down beside Estragon.)
#
VLADIMIR: We can still part, if you think it would be better.
ESTRAGON: It's not worthwhile now.
Silence.
VLADIMIR: No, it's not worthwhile now.
Silence.
ESTRAGON: Well, shall we go?
VLADIMIR: Yes, let's go.
They do not move. (Curtain)
I find existential crises or meaninglessness of human existence in the irrational and indifference Universe during the above mentioned scene more. Because after the fifty years of togetherness they are still confused whether there is any essence of their togetherness in their life or not. More than that, what should be the existential crisis? They are still searching for the answers for their togetherness. They are still in search of the meaning of their life. They are still finding the very core goal behind their togetherness.
14) Vladimir and Estragon talks about ‘hanging’ themselves and commit suicide, but they do not do so. How do you read this idea of suicide in Existentialism?
Vladimir and Estragon talks about hanging themselves and decide to commit suicide. But they do not. One possible reason can be given to that is that we are habituated to living life. First we learn to live life and then we are able to escape from that. Because we get somewhat used to it. Now we can't kill ourselves because we love to live our life whether there are problems or not, because suffering is a basic tendency to live life.
15) Can we do any political reading of the play if we see European nations represented by the 'names' of the characters (Vladimir - Russia; Estragon - France; Pozzo - Italy and Lucky - England)? What interpretation can be inferred from the play written just after World War II? Which country stands for 'Godot'?
Waiting for Godot is written after the second world war. So, War effects can be clearly noticed here. Some characters also represent some countries on the basis that we can do Political reading of play.
If we do political reading and connect character with European nations then Vladimir stands for Russia, Estragon for France, Pozzo represents Italy and Lucky symbolizes England.
16) So far as Pozzo and Lucky [master and slave] are concerned, we have to remember that Beckett was a disciple of Joyce and that Joyce hated England. Beckett meant Pozzo to be England, and Lucky to be Ireland." (Bert Lahr who played Estragon in a Broadway production). Does this reading make any sense? Why? How? What?
Pozzo represents England and Lucky represents Ireland. The relationship between both characters is like a Master-Slave Relationship. Lucky is enslaved by Pozzo in the same manner Ireland is also under control of England. After getting independence still Ireland is not able to completely come out from colonial effects. Ireland is still dependent on England for its economy.
The more the things change, the more it remains similar. There seems to have been no change in Act I and Act II of the play. Even the conversation between Vladimir and the Boy sounds almost similar. But there is one major change. In Act I, in reply to Boy;s question, Vladimir says:
"BOY: What am I to tell Mr. Godot, Sir?
VLADIMIR: Tell him . . . (he hesitates) . . . tell him you saw us. (Pause.) You did see us, didn't you?
17) How does this conversation go in Act II? Is there any change in seeming similar situations and conversation? If so, what is it? What does it signify?
The play followed the notion that the more the things change, the more it remains similar. Both acts are almost similar in their waiting, settings, in their conversation and in the thematic concern.
But, There is a slight difference between these conversations in both acts. The oly replaced phrase is 'me' instead of 'us' in act 2. (Tell him that you saw us). So here we can see that at the end of Act 2 Vladimir became somewhat selfish and self-centered.
References
- Ajemian, Allison. Pertinence of Props in Waiting for Godot. 11 Dec. 2013, bu.digication.com/allison_ajemians_theatre_now_portfolio/Final_Paper_Pertinence_of_Props_in_Waiting_for_God.
- Beckett, Samuel. Waiting for Godot: Tragicomedy in 2 acts. Grove Press, 1954.
- Editorial, Artsy, and Alina Cohen. Unraveling the Mysteries behind Caspar David Friedrich's "Wanderer". 6 Aug. 2018, www.artsy.net/article/artsy-editorial-unraveling-mysteries-caspar-david-friedrichs-wanderer.
- Martin Esslin's essay 'The Search for the self'
Post a Comment