Waiting for Godot by Samuel Beckett

Waiting for Godot by Samuel Beckett

Thinking activity given by Prof. Dilip Barad sir,

Samuel Beckett

                         Samuel Beckett was one of the famous Irish novelist, playwright, short story writer, theater director, poet and literary translator. He was born at Dublin in 13 April 1906 and died at Paris in 22 Dec. 1989. Beckett was awarded the 1969 for Nobel Prize in Literature for his writing which in new forms for the novel and drama.  He also has known for “Theater of the Absurd”. His work generally focused on the idea of Existentialism and expressed what happens when human existence has no meaning or purpose and therefore all communication breaks down.

            Waiting for Godot is remaining only two characters Vladimir and Estragon who waits someone named Godot. In this play no female character, Plot less play, no beginning no end.  This play also translation of his own original French language play “En attendant Godot”. Its Tragicomic play which divided into two acts.

Que.:-1) What connection do you see in the setting (‘ A country road, a tree and Evening’) of the play and these paintings.

Ans :- Caspar David Friedrich is a famous German romantic landscape painter. The visualization and portrayal of landscape in entirely new manner was Friedrich’s key innovation.  According to Friedrich that “The artist should paint not only what he sees before him but also what he sees within him…” So here following painting was drawn by Friedrich may be from which Beckett obtained idea of setting of the play. I think that here Beckett wants to connect with waiting and also two characters who stay on and their notice movements of sun under the tree.

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

Ans :- The tree in the play is reflecting nature. Mostly people take nature as something which coordinate with human. Romanticism also sing a song of nature as supporter in every ups and downs in human life. But in this modern play Beckett shows nature as totally indifferent from human life. Here tree stands for it self and not representing any character from play. It don’t has anything to do with the quest and misery of any human’s  life. In second act there are leaves on tree which shows it does not wait with Vladimir and Estragon for Godot. Nature don’t need any Godot and it also don’t sympathies with human beings. It doesn’t have rationality but human always try to give rational meanings to it. It works on its own way and it has its own world.

Que.:-3) In both acts, evening falls into night and moon rises. How would you like to interpret this “Coming for night and moon” when actually they are waiting for Godot?

Ans :- We can interpret this moon as brightness in the night so, I think Beckett want to convey through this moon's brightness in the night means though the darkness of night there is somewhat hope like the brightness of the moon. So, we should not lost our hope, every day is new day.

Que.:-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?

Ans :- Director fills setting with debris which shows that how freckle the materializing world is. It brakes down and don’t has capacity to stand again while on the other hand there is barren tree which in next act has some leaves. Nature or we can say reality can stand and sustain on its own, while cultural or fake things can be brake down in to the pieces. To show this shattered nature of world may be director has fills the setting with debris.

Que.:-5) The play begins with the dialogue “Nothing to be done”. How the theme of “Nothingness” does recur in the play?

Ans :-The beginning of the play it self suggest the meaninglessness of life. “Nothing to be done”. There is nothing in life to do. Though human beings always try to find some meaning in life same as Vladimir and Estragon tries to find meaning in waiting and also while killing the time. Doing nothing is also doing something. It don’t has any meaning but we always try to rationalize it. But at the end of the day every thing is meaningless.

Que.:-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)?

Ans :- I am agree with the ideas of Marshal because normally we thought about better future or happy ending of our life but I think that If we do work with appropriate time with proper process so that at the end of the life we can get as a result something more achieve rather which we think. Another thing is that nobody come to help and solve our problem hence we find solution own way without waiting of somebody.

Que.:-7) How are the props like hat and boots used in the play? What is the symbolical significance of these props?

Ans :- The props like hat and boots are representing human’s attraction towards mind or body. Hat symbolically represents the mind as Vladimir is with hat and he keep on thinking, same with lucky, when he starts thinking then to stop him one has to remove his hat. While Estragon has hat but he don’t use it he is more concentrate on his boots which are not comforting to him. In second act when he finds fit to him he is satisfy with it. It shows that how some people are constantly thinking and how some are constantly comforting their bodily needs. With this vast difference also both are at same place.

Que.:-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?

Ans :- Sometimes we can get chance to be free from some constructed situation though we can not grab the opportunity because we are habituated with that constructed situation, it can not permit us to think beyond. Lucky knows well that his master has no power to see anything yet he do not go away from him and serving him without the question of real freedom. It is unbelievable as rational thinker but those who living sheeple's kind of life, they can be driven with the flow without questioning.

Que.:-9)Who according to you is Godot? God? An object of desire? Death? Goal? Success? Or . . .

Ans :- In the play Godot used like God, object of desire, death, goal and success...etc. If I read as a religion point of view So that Godot is as God but If I think as a materialistic view so that Godot is used as desire so here we can see with various obstacles.  According to my point of view Godot is not interprets as god but as desire for something more achieve in the life which never fulfill. One desire complete then another desire keeps in our mind So that desire never ends and we all suffer through failure desire like Vladimir and Estragon.

Que.:-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?

Ans :- I do agree with Martin Esslin. Because if Godot was subject of the play at the end we might have some clarity that who is Godot and may be he will come also at the end. But the subject of the play is waiting. It is so because Beckett wants to make us feel the flow of time during waiting, and how our whole life is only waiting for death. So we can say that the subject of play is waiting and not Godot.

Que.:-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?

Ans :-  According to me the reading and viewing both can be beneficial and required of the play. Because if you only watch the movie then it can be bore. Because it has the continous dialogues and less action. For the understanding of the deeper philosophy one has to read the play. Only reading also makes you boring because you will not be able to imagine Vladimir and Estragon and their useless action. We have to done both the things in the class which enriched our understanding of the play.

THANK YOU