Monday, September 26, 2016
Waiting...
We have been reading the play, Waiting for Godot. This week we are trying to figure it out. For this week's blog, read this article that makes the assertion that of the "100 best nonfiction books: Godot by Samuel Beckett would be 29th." Pull two points made by the article and defend them using the text as your evidence.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Robert McCrum’s article about Waiting for Godot gives details about the background of Beckett and the works he has written. McCrum’s article also does a great job in highlighting the point within Godot that the play provides “a metaphor for existence.” It is explained that Beckett was one of the first “writers of the absurd” and that his work helped to illuminate existentialism in the era after WWII. Many believe that the character Godot is meant to represent God, however, Beckett himself that while the names of both Godot and God are similar, it is just a coincidence, for when the play was first written, it was entirely in french. The main theme and question is posed best by Vladimir, who states: “What are we doing here, that is the question. And we are blessed in this, that we happen to know the answer” (Beckett 70). When referencing ‘here’ Beckett is not only asking it for Vladimir and Estragon and their present situation, but also in a more abstract way that makes the reader question the essence of their life.
ReplyDeleteWhile the meaning of Beckett’s writing is self-described as a “tragicomedy,” the comedy aspect is rather a comment about the existentialist absurdity that comes with examining life. McCrum says that “for Beckett, the examined life is both the beginning, and the end, of the human comedy,” meaning that spending so much time focused on the meaning of life, takes away from the the living of life itself. The following exchange within Godot shows that even the characters are aware that, when thought about, the whole concept of Godot is odd:
VLADIMIR: What do they say?
ESTRAGON: They talk about their lives.
VLADIMIR: To have lived is not enough for them.
ESTRAGON: They have to talk about it.
AHH! Sorry Jessica, I didn't read your Blog until I posted mine, and realized we have the same quotes. Great points and explanations though, I agree completely.
DeleteRobert McCrum discusses the background of Samuel Beckett, along with the themes and symbols of Waiting for Godot in his article “100 best nonfiction books: Godot by Samuel Beckett would be 29th”. Although multiple points were made, a specific few stuck out to me in particular. First, McCrum describes the opening scene of simply the two men and a bare tree. He writes, “...the audience is pitched into a world in which the idea of boredom becomes a prolonged metaphor about the nature of existence.” This point relates to my topic for the Godot Jigsaw of Existentialism and how the basis of human existence is about taking action, instead of being bored, just waiting around for something to happen.
ReplyDelete“Estragon: What do we do now?
Vladimir: Wait for Godot.
Estragon: Ah!
Silence
Vladimir: This is awful!” (Beckett 70).
Godot represents goals in life. A person cannot sit around and wait for it to come to them. They have to leave and work for it themselves. Goals are what keep individuals motivated and occupied, the nature of our existence. Without them, there would be no objective in life, thus the continual boredom. In addition to Godot representing goals, I believed Godot represented God, leading into another eye-catching point McCrum made in his article. In a Beckett biography, he explains “I am not aware of the meanings attached to the word ‘Godot’, and the opinion of many that it means ‘God’.” He was, however, insistent that “I wrote the play in French, and if I did have that meaning in my mind, it was somewhere in my unconscious and I was not overtly aware of it.” After reading and processing this statement, I realized Beckett did not intend to make this a relation to God. I still heavily believe there is a strong relation between the two, as connections can be made throughout the text.
“Estragon: Don’t let’s do anything. It’s safer.
Vladimir: Let’s wait and see what he says.
Estragon: Who?
Vladimir: Godot.
Estragon: Good idea.
Vladimir: Let’s wait till we know exactly how we stand” (Beckett 13).
God is the end-all judge of life on Earth, and the above quote implies Godot is the judge of Vladimir and Estragon. I respect the fact that Beckett had no intention of relating it to God, but this idea could still be related to religious aspects and God. McCrum helped uncover more parts of Godot that were unknown to me. I look forward to digging deeper into the text and discovering what Beckett’s true motives were behind Waiting for Godot.
I felt such a strong sense of parallelism while reading this article to all of our discussions made in class. So far our presentations have included symbolism, stage directions, and the aspects of death/existentialism; all were evident in the article, and are all reasons why Waiting for Godot is considered the 29th best nonfiction book. I find it interesting that although Beckett’s novel is not an actual nonfiction novel, it has so much realism and context that it could be considered to be: “We wait. We are bored. [He throws up his hand.] No, don’t protest, we are bored to death, there’s no denying it. Good” (Beckett 71). Although we talked about death a lot in class, I don’t think this quote was brought up. The idea of death here is based off of boredness, which connects to the idea of individuals in their everyday lives, and the fact that some people never live life to the fullest. This play is considered a comedy, but the different serious and emotional topics are what add the “tragic” to it: “The circumstances of Waiting for Godot are bleak and existential, but the main characters, “Didi” and “Gogo”, exhibit a manic energy and utter dialogue of such entrancing polyphony, laced with moments of profound and resonant silence, that the experience for the audience can be a mood of optimism and often hilarity. Beckett’s vision might be dark, but his touch is supremely light” (McCrum). This back and forth between darkness and light that McCrum speaks of is what makes it considerable for a non-fiction interpretation; things happen, good and bad. This article allowed me to look at this play in a different light, coming from a completely different, non-fiction point of view.
ReplyDeleteMy favorite part of McCrum’s article is when he states: ‘Thus, from the moment Vladimir and Estragon step onto an empty stage furnished with nothing more than a bare tree and utter the famous opening line: “Nothing to be done”, the audience is pitched into a world in which the idea of boredom becomes a prolonged metaphor about the nature of existence.’ What draws people’s attention to this play is the words and the meaning behind it all. I am a little bias when it comes to this topic because I was in the group that did Stage Directions for our presentation, but the wording McCum uses to describe the challenges the actors face, and the simplistic atmosphere of the play could not have been more accurate. The empty stage with nothing but a bare tree is a hard atmosphere to act from. This is what makes the piece so beautiful; the whole thing is based off of acting, the words said, and how they are said it. Although dramatic and theatrical plays/movies are great, a simple and classic piece that intrigues people with its words is definitely one to keep: “Its abominable! When! When! One day, is that not enough for you, one day he went dumb, one day I went blind, one day we’ll go deaf, one day we were born, one day we shall die, the same day, the same second, is that not enough for you?” (Beckett 80). These words that Pozzo speaks will stick with viewers, along with multiple other quotes. The fact that Beckett was able to take a tree and two homeless people, and come out of it with a written and performed masterpiece is astonishing.
In his article, “The 100 best nonfiction books”, Robert McCrum describes Samuel Beckett’s tragicomedy, “Waiting for Godot”, number 29 on the list, as a nonfiction book, from which a lesson is learned about existence and absurdism. McCrum begins the article by introducing the novel, as well as its author, his innovation, and the establishment of the Theatre of the Absurd. He writes that “boredom becomes a prolonged metaphor about the nature of existence” (McCrum). Vladimir and Estragon’s waiting provokes the reader to question their purpose outside of the novel, but from Pozzo emerges existentialist thoughts:
ReplyDelete“Estragon: [scenting charity] We’re in no hurry.
Pozzo: [having lit his pipe] The second is never so sweet… [he takes the pipe out of his mouth, contemplates it] … as the first I mean. [He puts the pipe back in his mouth.] But it’s sweet just the same.
Vladimir: I’m going.
Pozzo: He can no longer endure my presence. I am perhaps not particularly human, but who cares?” (Beckett 20).
I interpreted this sentiment to mean that Pozzo is questioning himself and his position in society, when Vladimir becomes bored with Pozzo’s presence. Vladimir and Estragon are perfectly content in their position by the tree, but Pozzo becomes easily bored and begins to think deeply about the pipe he is smoking. Once Vladimir realizes Pozzo’s thoughts are becoming more meaningful and disturbing the peace of boredom, he wants to leave. The rhythmic placement of boredom drives the novel into the existentialist role it takes. Another point McCrum argues is that “Beckett’s vision might be dark, but his touch is supremely light.” Beckett adds in humorous points to his play to keep the absurdist theme and to keep the reader from categorizing the play as otherwise. The dog song is both dark and humorous:
“A dog came in the kitchen
And stole a crust of bread.
Then cook up with a ladle
And beat him till he was dead” (Beckett 47).
The abuse in the song is serious, but the tone and suddenness is funny to read, keeping the mood light. If the book were more somber, it would be more Nihilistic than existentialist or absurdist.
Robert McCrum discusses the nature of comedy and Beckett’s style in writing Godot in his article “100 best nonfiction books: #29 Waiting for Godot by Samuel Beckett”. Any decent comedian knows that delivery is one of the most important aspects of a joke. McCrum highlights Beckett’s ability to have a very dark message and vision but his delivery is very light. The lightness of this delivery can be seen in Didi and Gogo’s interaction on page 41, “Vladimir: Not really! Since when?
ReplyDeleteEstragon: I’d forgotten.
Vladimir: Extraordinary the tricks that memory plays!
[Estragon tries to speak, renounces, limps to his place, sits down and begins to take off his boots…]”. The light hearted delivery that Beckett uses helps the reader to create a better understanding of the meaning that Beckett is trying to convey. The presence of comedy in the story at all is incredibly important. Beckett could have left the play without any comedic interaction but then lines like, “Estragon: They talk about their lives.
Vladimir: To have lived is not enough for them.
Estragon: They have to talk about it.
Vladimir: To be dead is not enough for them.
Estragon: It is not sufficient”, would only leave the reader feeling gloomy and reflective upon the seeming uselessness of life. Instead, previous comedy and interaction such as, “Estragon: In the meantime let us try to converse calmly, since we are incapable of keeping silent.
Vladimir: You’re right, we’re inexhaustible”, help the reader understand that despite the struggle and lack of clarity life still is good.
In Robert McCrum’s “100 best nonfiction books: Godot by Samuel Beckett would be 29th”, McCrum discusses the background of Samuel Beckett as well as an analysis of why “Waiting for Godot” is what he refers to as a “theatrical revolution”(McCrum). McCrum opens the article with the assertion that from the very first line of the play, “the audience is pitched into a world in which the idea of boredom becomes a prolonged metaphor about the nature of existence”(McCrum). Throughout the entire play, Estragon and Vladimir practically do nothing more than wait for Godot, however, this stagnant plot means much more than what appears on the surface. Estragon and Vladimir’s wait for Godot symbolizes mankind's “inexhaustible search for meaning”(Beckett Cover). Even though Estragon and Vladimir wait for Godot for an extensive period of time, he never comes; and that’s the whole point. This process of waiting causes them to avoid doing things that could give them the purpose and meaning they’re looking for because instead of taking action to acquire the purpose and meaning they incessantly search for, they wait for it. This can be seen in the following conversation between Estragon and Vladimir:
ReplyDelete“Estragon: Let's Go.
Vladimir: We can’t.
Estragon: Why not?
Vladimir: We’re waiting for Godot.” (Beckett, 68).
The only justification that the characters have for their inaction is the fact that they are waiting for Godot, their purpose. This parallels the inaction that the audience may take in their own lives in finding their own purpose, illustrating that waiting for something to happen that potentially never will will only leave you in a stagnant way of life. This commentary is powerful because it evokes motivation in the members of the audience by inspiring them to take action towards what they want to want to achieve instead of just waiting for it. McCrum further goes on to make the claim that “Beckett’s vision might be dark, but his touch is supremely light”(McCrum). Throughout the play, Beckett creates significant commentary on humanity as well as our search for meaning in the world. To help the audience digest his ideology in an understandable but not overwhelming way, he incorporates comical elements into his play. The most evident instance of this from this play can be seen in the attire of the characters. The way that the characters are presented as well as act parallels clowns. The characters wear boots, bowler hats, and clothes which are much too big for them, paralleling the way that clowns dress. This can be seen in the scene when Estragon suggests that they hang themselves. Following not being able to find an adequate rope, Estragon finds an alternate source through the following stage direction: “[Estragon loosens the cord that holds up his trousers, which, much too big for him, fall about his ankles]” (Beckett 84). Estragon’s pants falling down while he mentions suicide adds a lighter tone to the play by removing a bit of the seriousness of the situation taking place, however, it doesn’t affect the potency of the commentary being made.
In the article “The 100 best nonfiction books: No 29”, McCrum explains that Waiting for Godot is a metaphor for existence. In the opening paragraph McCrum states, “Together with some essential volumes of poetry (see Nos 4, 11 and 17), this extraordinary drama would not only exert a profound influence on the postwar imagination, it would provide a metaphor for existence.” Vladimir and Estragon’s boredom contributes to the absurdity of their existence. Their boredom leads them to question why they are waiting and contemplate hanging themselves.
ReplyDelete“Estragon: Why don’t we hang ourselves?
Vladimir: With what?
Estragon: You haven't got a bit of rope?
Vladimir: No” (Beckett 108).
Vladimir and Estragon suggest that they should hang themselves in order to find something to do other than wait. By waiting for Godot they are waiting to find their purpose. They are unable to find their purpose because Godot never actually showed up and they did not have the ability to find their purpose on their. Although they are expecting Godot to provide them with answers and many people believe that Godot was meant to represent God, McCrum points out that the author did not intend for Godot to represent God. In the play Pozzo says, “Why it’s very natural, very natural. I myself in your situation, if I myself had an appointment with a Godin… Godet… Godot anyhow you see who I mean, I’d wait till it was black night before I gave up” (Beckett 36). Many people would see this as a reference to God and people waiting for God to answer their prayers but that it is not how Beckett intended for Godot to be seen. I think that it is important that Beckett did not clearly say or intend for Godot to be a representation of God because it allows the reader to have their own interpretation of Godot and the play as a whole.
The article makes several points about Waiting for Godot that help explain how it was viewed by the public, and provides insight on the author of the book. One point that is made is that “... the audience is pitched into a world in which the idea of boredom becomes a prolonged metaphor about the nature of existence…”. Throughout the entire novel the characters are constantly waiting for Godot, and don't know what to do with themselves. They search for things to do, and often ask why they are there. Through their boredom, they lose a sense of real purpose. They find small things to do to cure their boredom for a while. “Vladimir: ‘Itd pass the time. [Estragon hesitates.] I assure you it’d be an occupation’” (Beckett 59). Their existence and life is almost meaningless. The only thing they have to hold on to is Godot.
ReplyDeleteAnother point that is discussed is the idea of time. This is a significant aspect of the play, as it passes and the characters go through their lives, waiting for Godot. The characters repeatedly ask each other what time and what day it is. Time is an abstract concept for them that they can't keep track of. The passing of time is also drawn out, as the boredom grows and the men have to wait for Godot. A greater passage of time is shown through the tree which was dead in act one but full of leaves in act two. The time that passes is symbolic of the way that the characters are wasting their lives but not doing anything and just waiting for something to happen to them.
Waiting for Godot fits well onto a list of the top 100 best nonfiction books. It enlightens the reader with many questions of life, such as time, purpose, and even death. While the book does not make the foolish attempt to give answers to these existential questions, it helps the reader to look at them in a different light. As stated in the article, “one wit pit it, ‘nothing happens, twice.’” But, he is exactly right. Nothing does happen and the implication of such teaches a valuable life lesson, waiting your entire life for opportunity to come to you will never get you anywhere.
ReplyDeleteEstragon: I’m tired! Let’s go.
Vladimir: We can’t.
Estragon: Why not?
Vladimir: We’re waiting for Godot.
Estragon: Ah! What’ll we do, what’ll we do!
Vladimir: There’s nothing to do (Beckett 58).
Over the course of the book, they begin and end at the same place, as if the story in between had never happened. This is to show how fruitless waiting one’s entire life is and inspires the reader to take charge and make something of their lives. This inspiration makes Waiting for Godot a great fit at number 29 on McCrum’s list.
Aside from teaching life lessons, the book allows the reader to contemplate who they are. The characters in Godot are stuck not really knowing or remembering anything about themselves. Actions done the previous day are forgotten, just as faces and names are. This not knowing leads to a hopelessness in the characters. They seem lost and confused, even to the point where they try and kill themselves just to have something to do.
Vladimir: What do we do now?
Estragon: Wait.
Vladimir: Yes, but while waiting.
Estragon: What about hanging ourselves? (Beckett 9).
This drastic move leaves a lasting effect on its readers. It stresses the importance of being able to find oneself. Without finding oneself through whatever means available, suicide may become a thought. At that point, life without purpose is equal to being dead. The play shows how purposeless and hopeless Vladimir and Estragon felt. Instead of trying to find themselves they waited for Godot, placing their entire lives on a person they have never seen. The reader can learn who they are by reading this book, getting the inspiration to find themselves and not end up like Vladimir and Estragon. The book very much deserves its place at number 29, and in my opinion, maybe even a little higher on the list.
In this article, Robert McCrum gives readers background information on Waiting for Godot, including the comedy in the book as well as Beckett’s writing style. McCrum acknowledges the fact that the personalities and actions of Vladimir and Estragon create a mood of optimism and hilarity. This is found throughout the book.
ReplyDeleteEstragon: You say we have to come back tomorrow?
Vladimir: Yes.
Estragon: Then we can bring a good bit of rope.
Vladimir: Yes.
[Silence.]
...
Vladimir: We’ll hang ourselves tomorrow. Unless Godot comes (Beckett 84).
The whole story revolves around Vladimir and Estragon being optimistic to the extreme. If they weren’t so over the top about it, there would be no story to tell, because they most likely would’ve given up on waiting and gone home. It seems wrong to refer to the idea of the two main characters hanging themselves if Godot does not come as hilarious, but it is in the sense that it’s such a ridiculous idea to most readers. Hanging oneself over a person they have never met (and therefore may not exist) seems like such a rash, crazy decision to make. McCrum also discusses how “Beckett was offhand about his meaning”, and how it was unclear if Godot was supposed to be God or not. McCrum says that Beckett was insistent on the fact that he was not thinking about that when he wrote the play. This relates to my Godot Jigsaw topic. There are so many points throughout the story where it seems as if Beckett is directly comparing Godot to God. For example, on page 64, Vladimir says, “It’s Godot...We’re saved!”. This relates to the Christianity idea that Jesus (son of God) died on the cross for the sins of man.
Robert McCrum, in his article, “The 100 best nonfiction books: No 29-Waiting for Godot by Samuel Beckett (1952/53)”, makes the point that the play, Waiting for Godot, introduced the “theatre of the absurd”. McCrum makes the comment that most people who read the play or have seen it, consider it as something with no true content or meaning to it. In relation to the absurd aspect of the play, it states:
ReplyDelete“VLADIMIR: I thought it was he.
ESTRAGON: Who?
VLADIMIR: Godot.
ESTRAGON: Pah! The wind in the reeds.
VLADIMIR: I could have sworn I heard shouts.
ESTRAGON: And why would he shout?
VLADIMIR: At his horse.
Silence.
ESTRAGON: (violently) I'm hungry!
VLADIMIR: Do you want a carrot?” (Beckett 12).
In the beginning of this quote, Vladimir and Estragon are concerned on the arrival of Godot, which is the main part of this play. However, in the end, the mention of the horse and hungry turns the conversation upside towards carrots. Going from such an intense topic to such a seemingly worthless topic represents to absurdity in the differentiations of ideas in the play.
Another huge point that McCrum makes is that the entire play is “a metaphor for existence”. Existentialism conveyed through the boredom of both Vladimir and Estragon, in that their lives are without essence and meaning. For example, Beckett writes:
“VLADIMIR: Let us not waste our time in idle discourse! (Pause. Vehemently.) Let us do something, while we have the chance! It is not everyday that we are needed. Not indeed that we personally are needed. Others would meet the case equally well, if not better. To all mankind they were addressed, those cries for help still ringing in our ears! But at this place, at this moment of time, all mankind is us, whether we like it or not. Let us make the most of it, before it is too late! Let us represent worthily for once the foul brood to which a cruel fate consigned us!” (70).
Vladimir and Estragon have been waiting for days and even months for Godot, but at the same time they have wasted their lives. Godot seems to be the God that is holding both the men back from reality and Vladimir and Estragon always want validity from Godot for the actions, such as waiting. However, Vladimir, the one with more depth, sees beyond Godot and realizes that they must make something of themselves, straying from the path of God. He wants to find his own path and live as he should, not waiting for a purpose, but searching for a purpose.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteTwo of the main points that are made by the author in this article are both centered on dialogue in Waiting for Godot. The first is that the dialogue is often “entrancing, and has profound moments amidst the nearly constant rambling of Vladimir and Estragon. For example, after a conversation about Estragon’s boots. The two engage in this dialogue on page 57:
ReplyDeleteVladimir: What has Christ got to do with it? You’re not going to compare yourself to Christ!
Estragon: All my life I’ve compared myself to him.
Vladimir: But where he lived it was warm, it was dry!
Estragon: Yes. and they crucified quick.
(Silence)
Though the idea of Estragon’s boots does play a large role in the novel, the preceding conversation does not add much to the text other than to convey another lengthy gap between events. However these dialogues do hold much of what makes the book so interesting and frustrating, as this scene in particular conveys both the idea of religion and of death. Death plays a major role in the novel, from the topic of crucifixion, to the contemplations Estragon and Vladimir have of hanging themselves. Pointless dialogues followed by profound statements create the meat of this novel, and much of what our analyses have been based on.
The second point that this article makes is that Vladimir and Estragon, and therefore Samuel Beckett, enjoy teasing the audience in front of them. Much of the teasing comes in the form of their round-about point making, forgetfulness, and obvious avoidance of the events happening around them. For example, this dialogue between Vladimir and Estragon after Pozzo comes on stage, blind, and calling for help on pages 95-96:
Estragon: Suppose we got up to begin with?
Vladimir: No harm trying.
(They get up)
Estragon: Child’s play.
Vladimir: Simple question of will-power.
Estragon: And now?
Having spent most of their time in the play looking for something, anything, that would take away the boredom brought on by waiting for Godot, Vladimir and Estragon should be delighted by the change of events. However, they choose to ignore the continuously yelling Pozzo, and focus more on getting up of the ground where they were sitting. While somewhat annoying to the audience, who wants something to happen just as much as these two main characters do, it also adds to the idea behind the play. Two people, waiting for something, but choosing to do nothing about it.
This article makes very valid points on why Waiting For Godot is one of the top 100 nonfiction books. It teaches us lessons on life and can can be a metaphor for finding who we are. It gives the reader a different look on our existence and what we do with our lives.
ReplyDeleteThe whole book revolves around Vladimir and Estragon waiting for the always absent Godot. Godot can be a reference to religion as God can be pulled from his name. When Vladimir says "Its Godot... We're saved!" it can be say that the object that any religion worships has come and the people are rejoicing. For example in the christian faith the people were saved when Jesus dies for their sins. People the believe in Christianity followed Jesus even when he was called a fraud. This is like Vladimir and Estragon, the follow and wait for Godot even though it seems like he will never come. They are such loyal followers, which gives the book such meaning because the text would not have impact it does if they both stopped following Godot and moved on to something else.
Another key idea in the text is time. Throughout the story Vladimir and Estragon are constantly asking eachother what the date is or what time it is. The topic of time in the story is relative. For they two tramps the time seems longer because they are waiting for Godot and it feels like they have been waiting forever. The characters are waiting for something to happen instead of making something happen which makes their sense of time even longer.
Throughout this article, McCrum points out the general characteristics of Waiting For Godot and how most people view this play. One point I strongly agree with is that this play is an extended metaphor for life itself. The play emphasizes the difference between existence and essence.
ReplyDelete“Vladimir: Well? Shall we go?
Estragon: Yes, let’s go.
[They do not move.]” ( Beckett 85).
Estragon and Vladimir are just existing, not really doing anything to change their lives or leave a lasting impact. They could, however, leave their essence and find Godot themselves instead of waiting around for him to come to them. This teaches the lesson that if you really want something in life, you have to go get it and not wait for it to come to you, which is what life's all about. Another point I really liked was that this book is open to so many different interpretations and Godot representing “God” is a rather popular assumption. Beckett once said, “ ...and if I did have that meaning in mind, it was somewhere in my unconscious and I was not overtly aware of it”, addressing the ideal of Godot being God. Godot can represent practically anything that motivates a person to get through life. This could be religion or a life goal, but Godot is whatever the reader wants in life and is “waiting for”.
“ Vladimir: We’ll hang ourselves tomorrow, [ pause.] Unless Godot comes.
Estragon: And if he come?
Vladimir: We’ll be saved.” ( Beckett 84).
For Estragon and Vladimir, Godot seems to represent their salvation from their wrongs, which they can get from either Godot or death.
While reading McCrum’s article “100 best nonfiction books: Godot by Samuel Beckett would be 29th” two point seemed to stick out to me more than the other. The first point that stuck out to me was McCrum discussing how Waiting for Godot was delivered to the audience. McCrum writes, “Beckett’s vision might be dark, but his touch is supremely light” which refers to Beckett’s impeccable use of humor throughout the play. Humor is often used in this play when the theme becomes very dark in order to lighten the mood for the audience, allowing them to understand the message without feeling too burdened by its meaning. An example of this delivery can be found on page 83 and 84 when Becket writes,
ReplyDelete“Estragon: Why don’t we hang ourselves?
Vladimir: With what?
Estragon: You haven’t got a bit of rope?
Vladimir: No.
...Estragon: Wait, there’s my belt.
Vladimir: It’s too short...Show all the same. [Estragon loosens the cord that holds up his trousers which, much too big for him, fall about his ankles.]”
Although the characters are discussing the serious topic of hanging themselves, Beckett is able to make it humorous by having Estragon's pants fall down, allowing the comedy to ease any tension that may have been caused by his grave message.
The second point that stuck out to me was that McCrum stated that from the very beginning of the play “the audience is pitched into a world in which the idea of boredom becomes a prolonged metaphor about the nature of existence.” For the Godot jigsaw my topic had to do with the existentialism found embedded within the play and the “extended metaphor about the nature of existence” I think McCrum is referring to is about the action individuals should be taking in their lives. While talking about existentialism in class we discussed the idea of existing with no essence and that is what Vladimir and Estragon seem to be doing throughout the entirety of this piece. One of the themes of Waiting for Godot is that individuals should not sit around and wait for their salvation or fate to come find them, but they must go out and find these things on their own; they must take action and control over their lives. If we only wait for life to happen to us rather than partake in the life we have we are merely existing. In order to have essence in our life we must go out and find it for ourselves. This idea of existing without trying to find essence is highlighted in instances such as on page 85 when Beckett writes,
“Vladimir: Well? Shall we go?
Estragon: Yes, let’s go.
[They do not move.]”
While reading McCrum’s article “100 best nonfiction books: Godot by Samuel Beckett would be 29th” two point seemed to stick out to me more than the other. The first point that stuck out to me was McCrum discussing how Waiting for Godot was delivered to the audience. McCrum writes, “Beckett’s vision might be dark, but his touch is supremely light” which refers to Beckett’s impeccable use of humor throughout the play. Humor is often used in this play when the theme becomes very dark in order to lighten the mood for the audience, allowing them to understand the message without feeling too burdened by its meaning. An example of this delivery can be found on page 83 and 84 when Becket writes,
ReplyDelete“Estragon: Why don’t we hang ourselves?
Vladimir: With what?
Estragon: You haven’t got a bit of rope?
Vladimir: No.
...Estragon: Wait, there’s my belt.
Vladimir: It’s too short...Show all the same. [Estragon loosens the cord that holds up his trousers which, much too big for him, fall about his ankles.]”
Although the characters are discussing the serious topic of hanging themselves, Beckett is able to make it humorous by having Estragon's pants fall down, allowing the comedy to ease any tension that may have been caused by his grave message.
The second point that stuck out to me was that McCrum stated that from the very beginning of the play “the audience is pitched into a world in which the idea of boredom becomes a prolonged metaphor about the nature of existence.” For the Godot jigsaw my topic had to do with the existentialism found embedded within the play and the “extended metaphor about the nature of existence” I think McCrum is referring to is about the action individuals should be taking in their lives. While talking about existentialism in class we discussed the idea of existing with no essence and that is what Vladimir and Estragon seem to be doing throughout the entirety of this piece. One of the themes of Waiting for Godot is that individuals should not sit around and wait for their salvation or fate to come find them, but they must go out and find these things on their own; they must take action and control over their lives. If we only wait for life to happen to us rather than partake in the life we have we are merely existing. In order to have essence in our life we must go out and find it for ourselves. This idea of existing without trying to find essence is highlighted in instances such as on page 85 when Beckett writes,
“Vladimir: Well? Shall we go?
Estragon: Yes, let’s go.
[They do not move.]”
McCrum argues that Waiting for Godot is a nonfiction piece because it “contribute[s]... to the sense of who we are”. Beckett is able to do this through his masterpiece by confronting our everyday actions, and comparing them to the meaningless absurdity of Estragon and Vladimir. Their boredom dictates their actions, making their actions themselves very boring.
ReplyDelete“ESTRAGON:
He should be here.
VLADIMIR:
He didn't say for sure he'd come.
ESTRAGON:
And if he doesn't come?
VLADIMIR:
We'll come back tomorrow.
ESTRAGON:
And then the day after tomorrow.
VLADIMIR:
Possibly.
ESTRAGON:
And so on.”
Beckett’s play gives us a lifestyle with which to compare. By looking at the invalidity of Didi and Gogo, we can find the meaning of humanity by finding the differences. The moments of life that we remember are the moments that define what it means to be human.
McCrum also acknowledges Beckett’s ability to wind dark, complex ideas into light wit and humor. The moments where the play may become too heavy for the common audience are always countered with hilarity.
“VLADIMIR: We are no longer alone, waiting for the night, waiting for Godot, waiting for . . . waiting. All evening we have struggled, unassisted. Now it's over. It's already tomorrow.
POZZO:
Help!
VLADIMIR:
Time flows again already. The sun will set, the moon rise, and we away . . . from here.
POZZO:
Pity!
VLADIMIR:
Poor Pozzo!
ESTRAGON:
I knew it was him.
VLADIMIR:
Who?
ESTRAGON:
Godot.
VLADIMIR:
But it's not Godot.
ESTRAGON:
It's not Godot?
VLADIMIR:
It's not Godot.”
Beckett uses Vladimir to contemplate the deep, heavy, time swallowing emptiness of being alone. Didi begins to feel the effects of his wasted time, and conveys these feelings to the audience. However, before these heavy feelings of meaningless waste set into the audience, the characters are distracted into a more humorous set of events, thus winding a complex idea into a comedy. Beckett is able to comment on his own interpretation of humanity and existentialism while amusing the spectators, creating an audience of intellectuals and commoners alike.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIn Robert McCrum’s article on the best (loosely defined) “nonfiction” books, he ranks Waiting for Godot by Samuel Beckett at 29, claiming that its brilliance exhibits moments of “optimism and often hilarity” (2). In the play, Beckett weaves humor along with dark moods, something that is now commonly seen in absurdist plays. Near the end of Act II, Vladimir and Estragon are contemplating suicide:
ReplyDeleteVLADIMIR: Show all the same. (Estragon loosens the cord that holds up his trousers which,
Beckett purposefully included the stage directions to shift the mood in an ironic fashion much too big for him, fall about his ankles. They look at the cord.) It might do in a pinch.
ESTRAGON: We’ll soon see. Here. (They take an end of the cord and pull. It breaks. They almost fall.) (Beckett 60)
By taking humor to a place that was not frequently visited, Beckett started a revolutionary movement in the way that life could be viewed. Beckett uses this humor in an attempt to “break the silence,” which is ironic because much of the play centers around nothingness. Beckett also uses this humor to exploit how humorous situations that can occur in serious times. Much of this may be due to Beckett's involvement in World War II (McCrum 2). Since Beckett faced times that were veiled in darkness, his humor and ”quirky wit” could be seen as a way of breaking the blackness of the world (McCrum 2).
McCrum also explains how the ”circumstances of Waiting for Godot are bleak and existential,” but the the characters offer a “mood of optimism” (McCrum 2). Referring back to Beckett’s wartime efforts, optimism can often help when situations are bleak. Beckett exemplifies on this in ACT I:
VLADIMIR: He said that Godot was sure to come to-morrow. (Pause). What do you say to that?
ESTRAGON: Then all we have to do is wait on here. (Beckett 34-35)
Estragon’s unbeknownst optimism can be seen symbolically as the hopefulness that is found during war times. Beckett aimed to exploit this trait, whether it be to explain its hilarity or to show its usefulness to the poor. Estragon is content because he is hopeful that Godot will come, even though it is improbable. Beckett’s commentary can be seen both as cynical, in a sense that he views hopefulness as uselessness, and as praise, in a sense that Estragon is happier than someone who is aware. Overall, while McCrum brings up intricate topics that showcase the complexity of Waiting for Godot.
In “The 100 Best Nonfiction Books”, Robert McCrum argues “Waiting for Godot” is a “prolonged metaphor about the nature of existence”. If the play had to be summarized into one mere phrase, I believe this would be the perfect set of words to completely encapsulate the spirit of the play’s characters and the overall theme of the text. Throughout the book, Estragon and Vladimir meet every day (or, so we are led to believe) at the same tree, waiting for a person named Godot whom they have never met. This parallels our own nature of existence, where at times, we are waiting aimlessly for something that we desperately wish to happen, for little or no reason we can conclude. Vladimir and Estragon often have this same conversation-
ReplyDelete“Vladimir: Well? Shall we go?
Estragon: Yes, let’s go.
[They do not move.]” ( Beckett 85).- where they tell themselves they will move, and they will go, however, do not make any attempt to follow through. Their lack of motivation and their confusion about simple details can be compared to the ‘nature of existence’, where life is simply what you make of it, and only what you make of it. You alone exist, but your actions are what make you live an actual life, not one that consists of the same tree every day, waiting for something you don’t know.
McCrum also brings about the assertion that Beckett spectacularly uses humor throughout the play to entertain the audience and to ensure the mood does not become too dark. For example, Beckett writes
“Estragon: You haven’t got a bit of rope?
Vladimir: No.
Estragon: Wait, there’s my belt.
Vladimir: It’s too short...Show all the same. [Estragon loosens the cord that holds up his trousers which, much too big for him, fall about his ankles.]” (108).
The characters here are questioning killing themselves by hanging, which is not a topic with humor of any sort. However, Beckett manages to create a silly, likeable quality in Estragon, which brings light to a situation as dark as suicide. By bringing humor into a play centered around the purpose of life, he is able to connect with his audience, truly driving the message home and truly making his audience think, which I believe to be Beckett’s main goal.
In Robert McCrum’s, “100 best nonfiction books: Godot by Samuel Beckett would be 29th,” he discusses a variety of motifs and ideas concerning the play Waiting for Godot. McCrum states, “Beckett’s vision might be dark, but his touch is supremely light,” which is one of the most intriguing concepts of the entire article. This play is written in a very strange and almost whimsical tone. Every word and sentence is as confusing and random as the last, but it all holds an underlying meaning. So on the surface, David Beckett’s writing is very light but once his play is picked apart and analyzed the play can be seen from a much darker standpoint. This can be seen throughout the entire play but very obviously here,
ReplyDelete“Estragon: We’ve no rights anymore?
[Laugh of Vladimir, stifled as before, less the smile]
Vladimir: You’d make me laugh if it wasn’t prohibited.
Estragon: We’ve lost our rights?
Vladimir: [distinctly] We got rid of them” (Beckett 11).
This exchange is absurd as the audience does not understand their lack of rights or the context completely, so from a surface level this is a light confusing interaction. Then once the reader has finished the play and is able to dig into on a deeper level tones against the ideals of the church, and the idea of control and existence in general can be found, which is a much darker and heavier concept.
Another characteristic of Waiting for Godot that Robert McCrum noted on was, “...this extraordinary drama would not only exert a profound influence on the postwar imagination, it would provide a metaphor for existence” This could be seen in the play as Vladimir and Estragon live in a very odd stage of existence, as they do not have much of a memory,
“Vladimir: Is it possible that you’ve forgotten already?
Estragon: That’s the way I am. Either I forget immediately or I never forget.
Vladimir: And Pozzo and Lucky, have you forgotten them too?
Estragon: Pozzo and Lucky?
Vladimir: He’s forgotten everything!” (Beckett 51).
Vladimir has a better memory than Estragon but they both live in this hazy, repetitive state where you can see from the quote above that they can barely remember what happened one day ago. This all adds to this concept of existence as, can one truly exist if they are making no impact on the world and do not even remember their past or their essence?
In a list compiling the "Top 100 Nonfiction Books," writer and editor Robert McCrum lists Samuel Beckett's "Waiting For Godot" at number 29, arguing that it's absurdist comedy in an otherwise bleak existence grants it a unique and captivating stage. Some of the comedy is strictly light, to impart upon the "comedy" aspect of "tragicomedy", such as the scene in which Vladimir and Estragon find Lucky's abandoned hat, and proceed to wordlessly shuffle their hats, with the addition of the newly found hat, back and forth for an extended period of time, then promptly jump straight to humorously familiar and mocking dialogue (Beckett 62). While this makes the play enjoyable, what can make "Waiting For Godot" memorable is this lighthearted comedy in addition, and in contrast to, the dark gallows humor equally represented. For example, Vladimir and Estragon contemplate hanging themselves, solely to pass the time, and treat it the same as all their other humorous escapades;
ReplyDelete"VLADIMIR: ...what do we do now?
ESTRAGON: Wait.
VLADIMIR: Yes, but while waiting.
ESTRAGON: What about hanging ourselves?
VLADIMIR: Hmm. It'd give us an erection.
ESTRAGON: [highly excited] An erection!
VLADIMIR: With all that follows. Where it falls mandrakes grow. That's why they shriek when you pull them up. Did you know that?
ESTRAGON: Let's hang ourselves immediately!" (Beckett 9). Despite its grim and morbid tone, it holds the same odd, manic humor that makes "Waiting For Godot" comedic. However, as a "tragicomedy," the comedic elements alone are not what make the play so notable. As McCrum points out, "Time hangs both light and heavy. Occasionally, the waiting becomes too much" (McCrum). In the play, it seems that every day is identical to the last: Vladimir and Estragon talk while waiting for the mysterious Godot, night falls, and they are told that Godot couldn't make it, and will be there tomorrow. This leads to the apt description as "...a play in which nothing happens, twice" (Mercier). If one is willing to draw that to the logical conclusion, the end result is one that is rather depressing: two figures wait, and have been waiting, for untold years to always be met with failure, and due to every day being nigh identical, all information can be lost in the malaise of boredom. Pozzo gives this the best description: "POZZO: I don't remember having met anyone yesterday. But tomorrow I won't remember having met anyone today" (Beckett 79). With the passage of time practically trapped in an eternal loop where the characters are simply doomed to repeat every day with only vague knowledge of the previous, and identical, for an unfathomable amount of time could be seen by many as downright horrifying. Despite this horrible setting and life, Didi and Gogo continue on in their usually lighthearted banter, and this dichotomy, along with the absurdist nature and genuine entertainment value, allows critics and analysts like McCrum the freedom and right to rank "Waiting For Godot" as one of the best nonfiction books.
Robert McCrum’s article, “The 100 best nonfiction books: No 29 – Waiting for Godot by Samuel Beckett (1952/53),” explains many insights into the popularity of Beckett’s story, Waiting for Godot. When McCrum talks about the play’s introduction to the world, and reader’s reactions, he makes a point about the receivability of the piece. While one person can’t seem to fathom any meaning within the text, another finds it a “masterpiece.” This point accentuates the idea that absurdist writing is not easily understood without thought. Beckett did not write a play with a happy theme formed by direct explanation, but a variety of themes, existential and otherwise, formed by the perceptions of the audience. The last three lines of the play portray this idea:
ReplyDelete“Vladimir: Well? Shall we go?
Estragon: Yes, let’s go.
[They do not move.]” ( Beckett 85).
The reader looking for a direct and clear resolution, or an ending that sums up the theme of the story, would be disappointed. The reader who is able to think and follow different paths of possible meaning will find the interpretive nature of the play intriguing.
McCrum also asserts that Waiting For Godot, along with the other books on this list, attempt to answer the question of “who we are.” The commentary Beckett makes on human nature makes this extremely evident, but more importantly I think his use of “every man” characters sets the stage for a “who we are” kind of piece. There is very little physical description of any of the characters, particularly of Vladimir and Estragon. This is important because without these details, the reader cannot as easily identify with or classify the characters. We can then look at the characters and their experiences a bit more objectively, maybe even through our own eyes. This lends itself to the answering of “who we are” in that the reader can be made to think through the physical, and also moral, dilemmas that the characters face and find answers of their own in them.