Thinking Activity : Waiting for Godot by Samuel Beckett

This blog is part of my academic activity. To see task click here.

1]  What connection do you see in the setting (“A country road. A tree.Evening.”) of the play and these paintings?

• The play 'Waiting for Godot' was inspired by Caspar David's painting. The setting of the play and painting is similar. We can find 'Tree' in both, two-person waiting for someone, How nature remains indifferent to them is also same, as day and night came but the person remains at their place as it is without moving. Nature never waits for anyone.

2]  The tree is the only important ‘thing’ in the setting. What is the importance of tree in both acts? Why does Beckett grow a few leaves in Act II on the barren tree - The tree has four or five leaves-?

• Yes, The tree is the only important thing in the setting. Tree suggest the presence of nature in the ruined setting. In act l  Hopelessness presented through it because tree without leaf is like life without breath. But, in act II there are few leaves grows on the barren tree it shows the hope of rebirth. We can not exactly clarify reason that why Becket grows a few leaves on the barren tree, but Maybe he wants to show the hope. ‘Constant Waiting and yet nothing happens’ this condition of characters can lead them to disheartenment but they are spiritual or inner grow is shown through leaves on the barren tree.

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?

• Evening falls into night and moon rises signifies that the universe is indifferent to us.  Whatever happens in human life despair, anxiety, absurdity; nature’s cycle goes on.

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?

• We found setting with scattered fragments, something wrecked or destroyed. After two world wars, people's life became miserable. They find nothingness in the world. It inspires many literary writers to portray such images in artistic expression. Buckett was one of them. The setting reflects the influence of World war 2. 

5]  The play begins with the dialogue “Nothing to be done”. How does the theme of ‘nothingness’ recurs in the play?

• " Nothing to be done" reflects the Existentialism. This theory shows that life is meaningless, whatever you do it has no ultimate meaning. This play starts with this idea of nothingness.  Vladimir and Estragon waiting for Godot without knowing that he will come or not, is he exist or not, who is he?. Their incoherent babblings, changing of hats, unclear theme these all show the Nothingness of the play.

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. Marshal who played Vladimir in original Broadway production 1950s)?

• The play is completely optimistic. The dialogues between Vladimir and Estragon, Lucky and Pozzo, messenger the boy reflect the deep philosophy of life. As Pozzo exclaims " One day is not enough for, one day like any other day he went dumb, one day I went blind, one day we will go deaf, one day we were born, one day we"ll die, the same day, the same second........ " Hindu philosophy says that Nothing can be meaningless. you will gain the fruits of your deeds. And if life is meaningless yet we are going on living. So many people are connected with us but if we kill ourselves then also life will go on as it is for other people. We are almost on the verge of war with other country but yet we are living. Every time we face one or another fear, but after all, we live happily. 

7]  How are the props like hat and boots used in the play? What is the symbolical significance of these props?

•  Beckett has presented all the symbols very well. In the symbol of a hat, we can connect intellectuality. And boots as a dumbness of person. Or we can say carefree spirit with a valid reason as Estragon represents in the play. 

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 of slavishness is unbelievable?

• Yes, as I saw the film I think the obedience of Lucky is extremely irritating and nauseatic. When his master becomes blind he has the chance to run away but he didn't do that. We also like Lucky, we all have a chance to free from slavery but we are acting like Lucky. It raises the question of existence. We are tied up with some kind of rope from which we don't want to free.

9]  Who according to you is Godot? God? An object of desire? Death? Goal? Success? Or  . . .

• In the play, we can say that God is Godot. But according to me the deep desire to be something,  to achieve more and more in life. In between so many obstacles will keep coming but we don't have to stop. That's the thing which makes this play positively. 

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?

• In Martin Esslin’s essay ‘A Search for the self’ he said that the subject of the play is not Godot but waiting. I do agree with his statement because throughout our life we are waiting for something. We know that the future is unpredictable. So what? Can we give living life? Can we stop desiring something? Can we leave hope? No, we can’t. Our life itself is unpredictable but we go on living to meet with its end, i.e. death. So we can say that internally we are waiting for the liberation of our soul. And externally we are waiting for the death. But the common thing in the both is “waiting” and we can’t free ourselves from it.

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?

• Yes, I think that audio-visual gives us a better understanding of the play. It is also true that it doesn’t give us ample time to think. We have to move fast with changing scene on the screen. But if we try to look at the reading of the text it to has got some limitations for which in some parts we can’t imagine the actual scene or action or pause which is written in the text. But in a screening of this play, we came across a few things as such that why they take a pause or what does the meaning of silence in both the acts signify.

12]  Which of the following sequence you liked the most:

o   Vladimir – Estragon killing time in questions and conversations while waiting

o   Pozzo – Lucky episode in both acts

o   A conversation of Vladimir with the boy

• I like the conversational scene between Vladimir and Estragon. They pass many humorous dialogues while waiting to kill their time. As they make the audience burst out in laughter with their silly activities or silly questions over each other.

  

13]  Did you feel the effect of existential crisis or meaninglessness of human existence in the irrational and indifference Universe during the screening of the movie? Where and when exactly that feeling was felt, if ever it was?

• Yes, when Lucky and Pozzo enters it gives the different effect of the existence of Lucky. We can even tolerate the slavishness of Lucky. Pozzo treats Lucky as a slave, it raises the question on existential crises. How Lucky make himself slave for the piece of bones.

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 think to hang themselves. If we read it as an existential reader we can say that this idea of suicide is an existential idea. The idea of suicide rejects God. In Christianity suicide is an unforgivable sin. But they agree to commit suicide. They know about Christ and the Bible, though they decide to commit suicide. Though they did not do it, but not because of fear of God, but because they forgot to bring a rope. This idea of rejecting God and behaving on in owns way is an existential idea. So the idea of suicide can be read as existentialism.

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'?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 Broadway production). Does this reading make any sense? Why? How? What?

• European nations represented by the names of the characters. Vladimir represents Russia and Estragon represents France. There is a history of power politics between France and Russia. Many Russian are in favor of France and many against and vice versa. But still, they are together just like Estragon and Vladimir. Pozzo represents Italy and Lucky represents England, as in political reading Italy tries to impose their ideas and rule over England. Germany stands for Godot. As Hitler was ruling in Germany, and the way he excommunicated the Jews from his country is very much significant and relevant to the play. Both the tramps one or another way threw by their nations. The way they wait for Godot is similar to the way Jews waits for Hitler to accept them. 

17] The more the things change, the more it remains similar. There seems to have 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?

How does this conversation go in Act II? Is there any change in seeming similar situation and conversation? If so, what is it? What does it signify?

• In the ending of both the acts conversation between Vladimir and the boy who is a messenger of Godot happens. It seems similar but there is a slight difference which can be read deeply. In first act even if Estragon was sleeping Vladimir says to a boy that day visite you saw both of us. While in the ending of second act Vladimir says to a boy that tells Godot you saw me. This from "Us" to "Me" clearly shows selfishness. When a time of salvation comes maybe people become selfish. Vladimir has known the biblical story of two thieves. He maybe thought that if only one has to be saved then it should be him. So this slight change in dialogues has made big difference in meaning.