Waiting for Godot Study Guide

Samuel Beckett's “Waiting for Godot”

A Study Guide by Maggie Johnsen

Contents  

Preface On Samuel Beckett “Samuel Beckett – Biography” – Biography” from the European Graduate School Quotes “History of 'Waiting For Godot'” from the Rick on Theater blog b log Literary Analysis Who is Godot? Waiting An Excerpt on Balance and Repetition from Ruby Rub y Cohn's “Waiting” “Waiting” Other Things to Note Discussion Questions Places for Further Reading Bibliography ◦

◦

 

◦

◦

◦

◦

  

Samuel Beckett 16

Preface Whether Whether you have already seen Samuel Beckett's “Waiting for Godot” or you are about to see it for the first time, I implore you to keep an open mind. This play is a tragicomedy, a modernist piece, and Theatre of the Absurd –  Absurd – quite quite an intriguing, albeit imposing, combination for critical analysis. It cannot be judged by the same standards that we may use for plays with more common story structure, themes, and language use. us e. This is not to say sa y “Waiting “Waiting for Godot” has less to offer than other plays. pla ys. It  just might take a bit more thought to reach the deep fountain of insight Beckett has contained in jus t two acts. Due to the unique nature natur e of “Waiting for Godot”, literary analysis on it is convoluted, c onvoluted, lacking consensus. In this study guide, I will present some of the more popular interpretations of the play, and invite you to reach you own conclusions on what “Waiting “Waiting for Godot” means to you.

Samuel Beckett –  Beckett – Biography Biography from the European Graduate School 1

Samuel Beckett (April 13, 1906 –  1906 – December December 22, 1989) was an Irish avant-garde playwright, poet and novelist best known for his play Waiting Waiting for Godot. Strongly influenced by fellow Irish writer, James Joyce, Beckett is sometimes considered the last of the Modernists, however, as his body of work  influenced many subsequent writers, he is also considered one of the fathers of the Postmodernist movement. He was awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1969, "for his writing, which — in in new forms for the novel and drama — in in the destitution of modern man acquires its elevation." Born in the Dublin suburb of Foxrock on Good Friday, 1906, Samuel Barclay Beckett was the younger  of two sons born to William William Frank Beckett and May Ma y Barclay. The area surrounding sur rounding his family home featured in his prose and poetry later in life. Irish poet and Beckett biographer Anthony Cronin said of  Samuel Beckett’s childhood, “if anything, an outdoor type rather than an indoor one. He enjoyed games and was good at them. He roamed by himself as well as with his cousin and brother; and though he often retreated to his tower with a book and was already noticeable in the family circle for a certain moodiness and taciturnity, he could on the whole have passed for an athletic, extrovert little Protestant middle-class boy with excellent manners manners when forced to be sociable.” He attended Trinity College from 1923 to 1927, earning a Bachelor’s degree in French and Italian and developing a love for Romance languages and poetry from such esteemed tutors as Thomas RudmoseBrown, A.A. Luce and Bianca Esposito. He took a teaching position at Campbell College in Belfast  before moving to Paris to become a lecteur d’anglais d’an glais at the École Normale Supérieure. In Paris, Beckett was introduced to Irish novelist James Joyce that had a profound effect on Beckett’s Beckett’s life. Samuel Beckett biographer James Knowlson writes, of the relationship between James Joyce and Samuel Beckett, “They both had degrees in French and Italian, although from different universities in Dublin. Joyce's exceptional linguistic abilities and the wide range of his reading in Italian, German, French, and English impressed the linguist and scholar in Beckett, whose earlier studies allowed him to share with Joyce his passionate love of Dante. They both adored words -- their sounds, rhythms, shapes, etymologies, and histories -- and Joyce had a formidable vocabulary derived from many languages and a keen interest in the contemporary slang of several languages that Samuel Beckett admired and tried to emulate.” Around this time Samuel Beckett aided aided Joyce in his research for what would one day become Finnegan’s Wake, Wake, he also wrote a critical essay entitled, en titled, “Dante…Bruno. Vico.. Joyce,” in which Samuel Beckett defended James Joyce’s work and method. Samuel Beckett’s first published work, a short story entitled, “Assumption,” appeared in transition, a highly influential avant-garde serial edited by Franco-American writer Eugene Jolas. He won his first literary prize the following year with the poem, “Whoroscope,” which imagined Réné Déscartes meditating on the nature of time while waiting to be served an egg at a restaurant. Following his first two published works, Beckett returned to Dublin from Paris to accept a lecturing position at Trinity College. He became disillusioned with academia shortly thereafter and resigned from his position by  playing a practical joke on the college. Samuel Beckett invented a French author named Jean du Chas who had founded a literary movement called “concentrism” and presented a lecture on Chas and Concentrism to mock pedantry in the academic world.

Resigning from his position at Trinity College, he traveled through Europe and Britain, stopping in London to publish Proust, a critical study of Marcel Proust’s work and Beckett’s only published, longlongform work of criticism. During his travels, Beckett met many vagabonds and wanderers, which he would use as the bases for several of his most memorable characters. Throughout his European wanderings, Samuel Beckett also became interested in the works of Arthur Schopenhauer and decided to devote himself entirely to writing, beginning to work on his first novel Dream of Fair to Middling Women, which he subsequently subseq uently abandoned after little interest from publishers. William Beckett, Samuel Beckett’s father, to whom he was ver y close, died in 1933. Samuel was devastated by the loss of his father and sought treatment at Tavistock Clinic in London where he was treated by and studied under u nder influential British psychoanalyst psychoanal yst Dr. Wilfred Wilfred Brion. While at the Tavistock  Clinic, Beckett witnessed a lecture given by Dr. Carl Jung on the “never properly born” which affected much of his subsequent work including Watt, Watt, Waiting Waiting for Godot and All that Fall which ends with an almost word for word recitation of the end of Jung’s lecture. Beginning what would become his first published novel, Murphy, in 1935, Samuel Beckett traveled once again to Europe, this time to Germany where he documented with distaste the rise of the Nazi  party.  party. Returning to Ireland in 1937 to oversee the publication of Murphy, he had a major falling-out with his mother, which contributed to his desire d esire to leave Ireland and settle permanently in Paris. Par is. At the outset of 1938, Beckett had installed himself on the Left Bank of Paris where he renewed his friendship with James Joyce and became friends with artists like Alberto Giacometti and Marcel Duchamp. January of that year brought tragedy, he was accosted and stabbed in the chest by a pimp who went by the name “Prudent.” When asked by Samuel Beckett why he did this, Prudent replied, “I don’t know, sir. I’m sorry.” The dawn of World War War II found Samuel S amuel Beckett aiding the French Resistance as a courier. In August 1942 his unit was found out and he was forced to move with his lifelong companion, Suzanne Dechevaux-Dumesnil, to the town of Rousillon. There he continued to aid the Resistance while working on his novel Watt. Watt. As the war drew to a close, Samuel Beckett returned to Ireland where he had a critical epiphany. Fearing he would forever toil in the shadow of James Joyce, Joyce, a new path showed itself to him. “I realized that James Joyce had gone as far as one could in the direction of knowing more, [being] in control of one’s material. He was always adding to it; you only have to look at his proofs to see that. I realized that my own way was w as in impoverishment, in lack of knowledge and in taking away, in subtracting rather than in adding,” he wrote. He also began writing in French instead of his native English because he found it easier to write, “without style.” His first novel novel in French was entitled Mercier et Camier which was written in 1946 but not published until 1970. Immediately after Mercier  et Camier, he wrote what many believe to be b e his best prose pros e in the trilogy of Molloy, Molloy, Malone Dies and The Unnamable. Following this new path to full fruition, Samuel Beckett released his most famous work in 1953, the minimalist play, play, Waiting Waiting for Godot. Godot was very successful successf ul albeit controversial in the theaters of  Paris but was not as well received in London and in the US. As time progressed, however, Godot garnered critical acclaim, which ultimately saw Samuel Beckett awarded the International Publisher’ Formentor Prize in 1961. During this period Samuel Beckett also wrote the plays Endgame, Krapp’s Last Tape, Endgame and Play. Play.

This period also saw changes in Samuel Beckett’s personal life. His mother, with whom he had many difficulties, died in 1950 and his brother, Frank, died in 1954, both of these deaths affected Beckett’s later meditations on life and death in his work. He also married Suzanne in a private ceremony in England in 1961. The success of his plays not only offered him the ability to experiment with his writing but also enabled him to begin a career as a theater director as well as to branch out into other  mediums. In 1956 he was commissioned by the BBC to write the radio play All that Fall and continued to expand his scope into television and cinema. Suzanne, Samuel Beckett’s wife, received the news ne ws while they were on holiday in Tunis in 1969, that Samuel Beckett had been awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature, an event she described as a “catastrophe” for her intensely private husband. Despite the accolades and fame, however, Samuel Beckett remained a private man whose literary works continued to explore the outer reaches of  minimalism and experimentalism. His later work, which focused on themes of entrapment and frequently featured characters who were literally trapped from the neck down, went through many phases, culminating in three “closed space stories” in which he interrogates the nature of memory and its effect on the confined and observed self. His final work, written in 1988, was a poem entitled “Comment Dire (What is the Word),” which dealt with the inability to find the words to express oneself. Samuel Beckett died on the 22nd of December, 1989, just five months after his wife, Suzanne. They are interred together at the Cimitiére de Montparnasse in Paris in a tomb of simple granite, following Samuel Beckett’s instruction that it should be, “any colour, c olour, so long as it’s gray.” gray.”

Quotes It is a widely held belief that an author's comments on his own work hold more weight than the interpretations of readers. Beckett, not a proponent of this view, has purposely been very closed-mouth about his work. Here are some things he has said: “I feel the only line is to refuse to be involved in exegesis of any kind . . . . We have no elucidations 10 to offer of mysteries that are all of their own making”. -Beckett

“I began to write Godot as a relaxation, to get away from the awful prose I was writing at that time.” 6 (43)

-Beckett to Colin Duckworth 6 (43)

“That's the value of theater to me. You can place on stage a little world with its own laws.” -Beckett to Michael Haerdter

“I just felt like it. It was a different experience from writing in English.” “you could help writing poetry in English” 7 (68) -Beckett on writing in French instead of English

“If I had known who Godot is, I would have said”

7 (74)

-Beckett

“and besides, besides, there is a rue Godot, a cycling racer named Godot, so you see, the possibilities are rather  endless” 11 (7) -Beckett

"I am interested in the shape of ideas even e ven if I do not believe in them. There is a wonderful sentence in Augustine. I wish I could remember the Latin. It is even finer in Latin than in English. `Do not despair; one of the thieves was w as saved. Do not presume; one of the thieves was 8 (79) damned.' That sentence has a wonderful shape. shap e. It is the shape that matters." -Beckett

“You must be tired.” 9 -Beckett's reply to a fan who said he had been reading Beckett's work for years

“There is no escape from the hours and the days, neither from tomorrow nor from yesterday, because yesterday has deformed us or has been deformed by us...Yesterday us...Yesterday is not n ot a milestone that has passed but a daystone on the beaten track of the years and irremediably part of us, within us, heavy and dangerous. We We are not merely more weary because of yesterday, we are other, no 5 (31) longer what we were before the calamity of yesterday.” of yesterday.” -Beckett in Proust

“Habit is the ballast that chains the dog to his vomit. Breathing is habit. Life is habit. Or rather life is a succession of habits, since the individual is a succession of individuals....Habit then is the generic term for the countless treaties concluded between the countless subjects that constitute the individual and their countless correlative objects. The periods of transition that separate consecutive adaptations ...represent the perilous zones in the life of the individual, dangerous, precarious, painful, mysterious and fertile, when for a moment the boredom of living is replaced by the suffering of being.” 5 (38) -Beckett in Proust  15 (144)

“I suppose he is Lucky to have no more expectations” -Beckett when asked asked “ if Lucky was named so because he does not have to wait for Godot like Vladimir and Estragon do, but that he has his own Godot in Pozzo”

History of 'Waiting For Godot' from the Rick on Theater blog2

En attendant Godot was composed between 1947 and 1949 when Beckett was experiencing the first of  two sustained creative bursts. The French version, whose title actually means “while waiting for  Godot,” was published in 1952 and opened in Paris on 5 January 1953, for a run of more than 300  performances. The English version was published in New York York in 1954, played at the Arts Theatre in London the following year, and had its American première at Coconut Grove Playhouse in Miami on 3 January 1956. Bert Lahr, star of the Florida presentation, played Gogo again when the show moved to  New York York on 19 April, with E. G. G. Marshall as Didi, Kurt Kasznar as Pozzo, and Alvin Epstein as Lucky--all of whom repeated their roles for the Columbia Masterworks recording produced the same year. The play ran only 60 performances at the John Golden Theatre, but since then has been performed in twenty tongues--in such scattered parts of the world as Japan, Sweden, Yugoslavia, and Israel--and in all types of theaters: on campuses, in summer stock, in “little theaters,” and and in prisons. But almost every opening night of Godot has been marked by extreme reactions. The Paris production was hailed by many critics as a major dramatic breakthrough. No less a literary figure than Jean Anouilh declared in Arts-Spectacle on 27 January 1953: Godot is a masterpiece that will cause despair for men in general and playwrights in particular. I think  the opening night at the Théâtre de Babylone is as important as the opening of Pirandello in Paris in 1923 . . . . En attendant Godot was first performed in the small auditorium of the Théâtre de Babylone in Paris after a workshop presentation, broadcast on French radio, in February 1952. It was directed by Roger  Blin, a respected French director in the years after World World War War II, who also played Pozzo. Typical of the enthusiastic response--and most prophetic of all--was the opinion of Sylvain Zegel, who wrote in La Libération: Theater-lovers rarely have the pleasure of discovering a new author worthy of the name; an author who can give his dialogue true poetic force, who can animate his characters so vividly that the audience identifies with them; who, having meditated, does not amuse himself with mere word juggling; who deserves comparison with the greatest . . . . In my opinion Samuel Beckett’s Beckett’s first play Waiting for  Godot, at the Théâtre de Babylone, will be spoken of for a long time. English-speaking audiences, which had not seen as much avant-garde drama as had the Parisians, reacted with mixed feelings. (The British première was heavily expurgated, as censorship in England was strict. Not until the end of 1964 did an unabridged version of the script get a British staging.) Peter  Bull, who played Pozzo in the original British production directed by a young Peter Hall in 1955, witnessed a daunting occurrence. In his memoirs, I Know the Face, But . . ., he wrote: I have a habit of comforting myself on first nights by trying to think of appalling experiences during the war, when terror struck from all sides, but the windiness felt on the Italian beachheads . . . was nothing to compare with one’s panic on that evening evenin g of August 3, 1955 . . . . Waves Waves of hostility came whirling

over the footlights, and the mass exodus . . . started quite soon after the curtain had risen. The audible groans were also fairly disconcerting. Harold Hobson concluded his review in the London Lond on Times by saying: “Go and see Waiting for Godot. At the worst you will discover a curiosity, a four-leaved clover, a black tulip; at the best something s omething that will surely lodge in a corner corner of your mind for as long as you live.” In The Observer, Kenneth Tynan, Hobson’s fellow doyen of London criticism, asserted, “It is vividly new, and hence I declare myself, as the Spanish would wou ld say, Godotista.” But the American critic Marya Mannes wrote acidly in New York’s York’s The Reporter about the same London production: The play concerns two tramps who inform each other and the audience at the outset that they smell. It takes place in what appears to be the town dump, with a blasted tree rising out of a welter of rusting  junk including plumbing parts. They talk gibberish to each other and to two ‘symbolic’ maniacs for  several hours, their dialogue punctuated every few minutes by such remarks as ‘What are we waiting for?’ ‘Nothing is happening,’ and ‘Let’s hang ourselves.’ The last was a good suggestion, unhappily discarded. And surveying the London theater in 1957 for The Sewanee Review, Bonamy Dobreé said flatly about Godot: . . . it is time to affirm that anything that can be called art must ultimately be in praise of life, or must at least promote acceptance of life, thus indicating some values. Dobreé thus epitomized the widely-accepted widely-accepted view of the time that Beckett’s work, because of its “nihilism,” could not “be called art.” In Miami, a large segment of the audience left in disgust before the curtain rose for act two. As director  Alan Schneider put it in the Chelsea Review two years after the production closed: Doing Godot in Miami was, as Bert Lahr [the original Gogo] himself said, like doing Giselle in Roseland. Even though Bert Ber t and Tommy Tommy [Ewell, who played Didi in Miami] each contributed  brilliantly comic and extremely touching performances, . . . it was--in was-- in the words of the trade--a spectacular flop. The opening night audience in Miami, at best not too sophisticated or attuned to this type of material and at worst totally misled by advertising billing the play as “the laugh sensation of  two continents,” walked out in droves. And the so-called so-called reviewers not only could not make heads or  tails of the play but accused us of pulling some sort of hoax on them. The New York York production of 1956 1 956 garnered a mixture of critical response. In the Herald Tribune, Walter Kerr wrote, “. . . Mr. Lahr has . . . been be en in touch with what goes on in the minds and hearts hearts of  the folk out front. I wish that Mr. Beckett were as intimately in touch with the texture of things.” In the  New Republic, Eric Bentley dubbed Godot “like all modern plays . . . undramatic but highly theatrical.” He declared that “what has brought the the play before audiences in so many countries--aside from snobberies and phony publicity--is publicity--is its theatricality.” (Eleven years later, Bentley revised his estimation upwards.) On the other hand, for The New Yorker, Yorker, Kenneth Tynan, Tynan, already on record in London as praising the play, described the audience reaction: “And when the curtain fell, the house stood up to cheer a man [Bert Lahr] who had never before appeared in a legitimate play . . . . Without him, the Broadway production . . . would be admirable; with him, it is transfigured.” And the dean of   New York York critics, Brooks Atkinson of The New York York Times, calling the play “a mystery wrapped in an enigma,” wrote:

Although “Waiting “Waiting for Godot” is a “puzzlement,” as the King of Siam would express exp ress it, Mr. Beckett is no charlatan. He has strong feelings about the denigration of mankind, and he has given vent to them copiously. copiously. “Waiting “Waiting for Godot” is all feeling. Perhaps that is why it is puzzling and convincing conv incing at the same time. Theatregoers can rail at it, but they cannot can not ignore it. For Mr. Beckett is a valid writer. writer. At San Quentin Prison, on 19 November 1957, the inmates gathered in the converted gallows room responded as never before to a theatrical piece. The anonymous reviewer for the San Quentin News described this scene: The trio of muscle-men, biceps overflowing . . . parked all 642 lbs. on the aisle and waited for the girls and funny stuff. When this didn’t appear they audibly fumed and audibly decided to wait until the house lights dimmed before escaping. They made one error. They listened and looked two minutes too long--and stayed. Left at the end. All shook . . . . This presentation marked a link in the chain of productions of Beckett’s plays in prisons, something in which the writer took special interest. A few years earlier, ear lier, a prisoner in Lüttringhausen Prison Pr ison in Germany had staged a translation he had made from the original French edition. After the 1953  performances, the prisoner wrote Beckett: You will be surprised to be receiving a letter about abo ut your play Waiting for Godot, from a prison where whe re so many thieves, forgers, toughs, homos, crazy men and killers spend this bitch of a life waiting . . . and waiting . . . and waiting. Waiting for what? Godot? Perhaps. The Irish première at the Pike Theatre in Beckett’s native Dublin, directed by Alan Simpson, was on 28 October 1955. The BBC having aired the play on radio in 1960, NET (the precursor to PBS) broadcast a TV version in 1961 directed by Alan Schneider from his Miami production script. The stars of the telecast, also shown in the U.K., were Zero Mostel as Gogo and Burgess Meredith as Didi with Kasznar and Epstein repeating their stage roles. Becket pronounced himself displeased with the television staging, principally because of the confinement of the small screen. In more recent years, the play, still controversial, has continued to be produced all over the world. In 1984, Israeli director Ilan Ronen and the Haifa Municipal Theatre presented a bi-lingual production of  Godot in Hebrew and Arabic (with Arab actors as Didi and Gogo and Jewish actors as Lucky and Pozzo). Mike Nichols directed a much-publicized staging of the play in New York York at Lincoln Center in 1988; it starred Robin Williams as Gogo, Steve Martin as Didi, F. Murray Abraham as Pozzo and Bill Irwin, in what I believe was his first dramatic stage role, as Lucky. In 2001, British director Michael Lindsay-Hogg made a film version--despite version--despite Beckett’s own admonition in 1967 that he did not “want any film of Godot.” “An adaptation would destroy it,” the playwright insisted. British director Sean Mathias is directing Ian McKellen as Gogo and Patrick Stewart as Didi as his first production as artistic director of the Theatre Royal Haymarket Company. Dubbed the X-Men Godot (because both stars appeared in that film), it is touring Britain prior to opening in London on 30 April 2009. Just as Sylvain Zegel predicted over half a century ago, Godot is still being “spoken of.” Regardless of  the direction of the response--for or against--no one seems to be able to leave it alone. It stirs something in all audiences--be it anger or praise, but it stirs. Somehow that seems appropriately Beckettian--and, as the French say, godotesque.

Who is Godot? This is probably the first question audience members will have upon seeing “Waiting for  Godot”. It is the question Beckett refused to answer. Decades of literary analysis by scores of critics has not resulted in any consensus. There are, however, a few views that seem to have wide support. Do not make the mistake of immediately dissecting the word “Godot” to produce “God”, thereby narrowing your vision to see everything in the play as a biblical reference. Note that the original title of the play was “En attendant Godot” and the French word for god, dieu, bears dieu, bears no 14 resemblance to “Godot”. Keep an open mind throughout the play, and only afterward take the side of  the many critics who believe Godot to be a deity deit y. The biblical story of the two thieves is a central centr al to the 6 (43-44)  play.  play. Ruby Cohn writes, “Even “Even the fifth character, the nameless boy, has a brother, and he says that Godot beats the one but not the other. Godot is as arbitrary as the God of Matthew 25:32-33: 'And  before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them from f rom one another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats. And he shall set the sheep on his right hand but the goats on the left.' Sheep and goat become saved thief and damned thief of  St. Augustine's symmetry s ymmetry.” .” Godot may be seen as a divine being because of his absence. Eric Gans writes, “the action takes place 'en attendant'. Now this is precisely the role of the sacred in Judeo-Christian society: God never makes himself present, but belief in his presence offstage allows for worldly activity to go on while waiting waiting for his return.” 12 (99) Dissection of Lucky's speech also unveils possible religious overtones: “given the existence...of a personal God...with a white beard...outside time...who from the heights of divine...aphasia loves us dearly with some exceptions for reasons unknown...and suffers those who...are plunged in torment...it is established beyond all doubt...that man...fades away.” away.” Edith Kern writes that a “number of critics more or less agree on such a reading.” 13 (117) In act II, Vladimir and Estragon mistake Pozzo and Lucky for Cain and Abel. There are multiple other instances in which religious subjects, such as prayer, are suddenly brought up to be dropped just as quickly. The  possibility of salvation or damnation and the absence of God in the mundane mundan e lives of humans is a common theme in literature. The god in this play would be more unique in that he is an uncertain, seemingly uncaring, and maybe even cruel god. Godot as a god is a fair conjecture, though Beckett himself said to Ralph Richardson that if by Godot he had meant God, he would have written God and not Godot. 14 Another possible identity for “Godot” is actually Pozzo, though Beckett has stated, "No. It is just implied in the text, but it's not true." 14 Estragon and Vladimir both mistake Pozzo's arrival as that of  Godot. During my research for this study guide, I have read about Godot as: God, Pozzo, a bicycle racer, communism, the slang word for “boot” in French, liberation, a goal, death, hope, recognition of  Beckett's work, among other things. My conclusion –  conclusion – and and advice to you –  you – is is that it's better to not label Godot. To To do so effectively limits the scope s cope of the play and possibly leads to far-fetched interpretations. It is Godot's anonymity which makes this play timeless, universal. The identity of Godot is inconsequential to the play compared to his absence. Godot, who or what ever he may be, is a vehicle for the real subject matter of this play –  play – waiting. waiting.

Waiting The day after “Waiting for Godot” was successfully successful ly performed performed at San Quentin penitentiary in 1957 the prison newspaper released this article: “It was an expression, symbolic in order to avoid all personal error, by an author who expected each member of his audience to draw his own conclusions, make his own errors. It asked nothing in point, it forced no dramatized moral on the viewer, it held out no specific hope... We're still waiting for Godot, and shall continue to wait. When the scenery gets too drab and the action too slow, we'll call each other names and swear to  part forever - but - but then, there's no place to go!” 5 (23 -24) Who would know better what it feels like to be trapped in a monotonous cycle –  cycle –  just waiting for  release, or excitement, or even death –  death –  better  better than a prison inmate? “Waiting “Waiting for Godot” paints paints a picture of the human condition as incomplete or unfulfilled in some way. It is sad to think human lives, habits, and hopes may be as trite and asinine as the antics of Estragon and Vladimir. Estrogen and Vladimir  find their wait to be so unbearable that they contemplate suicide as an escape. Richard Gilman writes: “the validation the tramps seek for their lives is never forthcoming; there is no transcendent being or realm from which human justification proceeds, or rather...we cannot be sure whether there is not not. In this space this doubt create, Didi and Gogo exist...held there by an unbearable tension which it is their task...to make bearable.” 7 (70) It is a dreary state, in which habit and boredom seem to overcome all else. One aspect of waiting which everyone has experienced, whether it be at the bus stop or in the doctor's office, in the slowing of time. Estragon and Vladimir experience this on a daily basis, trying to  pass the time with jokes and inane conversation until the moon swiftly rises rise s at the end of each act. The following passages by Theater of the Absurd expert Martin Esslin skillfully describe the interaction of  time, waiting, and –  and – surprisingly surprisingly –   – hope: hope: “Waiting “Waiting is to experience the action of time, which is constant con stant change. And yet, yet, as nothing real ever happens, that change is in itself an illusion. The ceaseless activity of  time is self-defeating, purposeless, and therefore null and void. The more things change, the more they are the same. That is the terrible stability of the world. 'The tears of the world are are a constant quantity. For each one who began to weep, somewhere else another stops.' One day is like another, and when we die, we might never have existed.... Still Vladimir and Estragon live in hope: they wait for Godot, whose coming will  bring the flow of time to a stop. 'Tonight 'Tonight perphaps we shall sleep in his place, in warmth, dry, dry, our bellies full, on the straw. It is worth waiting for that, is it not?' This passage, omitted in the English version, clearly suggests the peace, the rest form waiting, the sense of having arrived in haven, that Godot represents to the two tramps. They are hoping to be saved from the evanescence and instability of the illusion of time, and to find peace and permanence outside it.” 5 (32-33)

An Excerpt on Balance and Repetition 6 (43-47) from Ruby Cohn's “Waiting” “Even before the curtain rises, the program informs us that there will be two acts, though we do not know how the second will reflect the first. The set pits the horizontal road on the stage board against the vertical tree. The action will balance four characters falling down against their looking up at the sky. The very names of the four main characters indicate their pairing: Pozzo and Lucky contain two syllables and five letters each; Estragon and Vladimir contain three syllables and eight letter each,  but they address one another only by b y nicknames –  nicknames – Gogo Gogo and Didi, childish four-letter words composed of repeating monosyllables. Even the fifth character, the nameless boy, has a brother, and he says that Godot beats one but not the other. Godot is as arbitrary as the God of Matthew 25:32-33: 'And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them from one another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats. And he shall set the sheep on his right hand but the goats on the left.' Sheep and goat become saved thief and damned thief thie f of St. Augustine's symmetry. symmetry. Didi broods about the two thieves early in the play, as we are getting acquainted with what looks like two thieves on stage. Though it is not specified in the text, Beckett's two thieves wear similar  clothes in the production –  production – the the black suit and derby of music hall or silent film, and we laugh at their  antics much of the time that they are constantly before us....Pozzo and Lucky have no nicknames, and we view them formally....Impersonal Pozzo and Lucky confront personal Gogo and Didi, and for all the many pages that have now been written about the play, Godot's theatricality rests squarely on this confrontation of the two couples. To To twist what Beckett said about the two-act structure of Godot: Godot: one couple would have been too few, and three would have been too many. Pozzo and Lucky alone would have been a caricature of human master-slave tendencies, a caricature of human obsession with moving “On”. Caricatures summon no sympathy. Without Without these contrasting characters, character s, however, we would respond less immediately to the concreteness of Didi and Gogo. We appreciate their friendship in the contrapuntal context of Pozzo and Lucky. In the shadow of these compulsive wanderers, who wander  into obvious deterioration, Didi and Gogo scintillate with variety. Each couple is more meaningful  because of the other, replacing the protagonist and antagonist of dramatic tradition.  None of these symmetries is exact, of course. cours e. Act 2 does not repeat act 1 precisely. precisely. Each member of each couple cou ple is distinctive and individual. And looming asymmetrically offstage is Godot.... From the beginning of the play Didi and Gogo emphasize the repetitive nature of their  activities. Were Were Beckett to direct the play, play, he would now begin with their attitude of waiting, which would be periodically repeated throughout the play. In the printed test the play begins when Estragon tries again to take of his boots. We read the first example of a frequently repeated scenic direction: “As before”....In Vladimir's first speech he talks about resuming  the struggle. He notes that Estragon is back   – wherever  – wherever “back” may be. Vladimir wants to celebrate his reunion with Estragon. Immediately after the first utterance of the most frequently repeated line in the play –  play – “We're “We're waiting for Godot” – the – the friends turn their attention to the stage tree. Estragon says: “Looks to me more like a bush.” Vladimir counters: “A shrub.” But Estragon Es tragon insists: “A bush.” This exchange sets a pattern of poetic variants and refrains, with Estragon always speaking the refrain lines. Throughout the play,  phrasal repetition, most naked in Lucky's manic monologue, is reinforced reinf orced by gestural repetition: Lucky with his luggage, Pozzo with his possessions, Gogo with his shoes, Didi with his hat, and the musichall routine in which Gogo and Didi juggle three hats (suggested to Beckett by the Marx Brothers'  Duck Soup). All the characters repeatedly stumble and fall, but in act 1 Didi and Gogo set Lucky on his

feet, and in act 2 they do the same for Pozzo. Repetition is theme and technique of Didi's round-song which reduces man's like to a dog's life –  life – and and cruel death. In the printed text of  En  En attendant Godot the most frequent repetitions are the two scenic directions: Silence and Pause. In the theater repeated stillness can reach a point of no return, but Beckett avoids this danger by adroit deployment of his pauses and silences. They act like theatrical  punctuation, a pause often marking hesitation or qualification, whereas silence sile nce is a brush with despair   before making a fresh start. The play never quite negates n egates the fresh start after stillness claims the stage in sudden night. All stage action has to be wrested from the background stillness, the ever-threatening void. Gogo realizes: “There's no lack of void.” And he recalls talking about “nothing in particular.” (The italics are mine; Beckett changes the French “boots” to “nothing” in the English version.) version.) Each of  the two acts end with the stillness after the same lines: “Well? Shall we go?” asks on of the friends, and the other replies: “Yes, let's go.” In neither act do they the y move as the curtain falls. The opening “Nothing to be done” is repeated three times. What distinguishes drama from fiction is that the Nothing has to be done, acted, preformed. The body of Beckett's play therefore contains much doing, constantly con stantly threatened by Nothing. To open each act, Gogo and Didi enter  separately, each in turn first on stage. At least one of them eats, excretes, sleeps, dreams, remembers,  plans, refers to sex or suicide. In both acts they comment on their reunion, they complain of their  misery, they seek escape into games, they are frightened by offstage menace, they try to remember a  past, they stammer a hope for a future, they the y utter doubts about time, place, and language, they wait for  Godot. Beckett's scenic directions show the range of their emotions: irritably, coldly, coldly, admiringly, decisively, decisively, gloomily, gloomily, cheerfully che erfully,, ffeebly eebly,, angrily, angrily, musingly m usingly,, despairingly desp airingly,, very v ery insidiously, insidiously, looking loo king wilding about, wheedling, voluptuously, voluptuously, gently, highly excited, grotesquely grotesquel y rigid, violently, meditatively, meditatively, vacuously, v acuously, timidly, timidly, conciliating, con ciliating, hastily, grudgingly, stutteringly, resolute, vehemently, forcibly, forcibly, tenderly, blankly, indignantly, indignantly, attentively, sadly, sadly, shocked, joyous, indifferent, vexed, suddenly su ddenly furious, exasperated, sententious, in anguish, sure of himself, controlling himself, triumphantly, stupefied, softly, recoiling, alarmed, laughing laughin g noisily, sagging, painfully, feverishly –  feverishly – with with violently and despairingly most frequent. In each act the two friends are diverted by an interlude –  interlude – the the play within the play of Pozzo and Lucky, Lucky, who enter and exit tied together. Reciting rhetorically and loaded with props, Pozzo and Lucky are cut down to size when they are “done” by Gogo and Didi in act 2. Alone again in each act, the friends are greeted by Godot's messenger, they hear the monotonous message, and the moon rises swiftly. Refrains, repetitions, and pauses camouflage how much is happening on stage. Only in retrospect, after viewing it all, do we realize how much is at stake in these hapless happenings.”

Other Things to Note The following brief descriptions are other things other things to note while view, reading, or analyzing anal yzing “Waiting “Waiting for  Godot”. Bondage There is a continued theme of bondage between: Estragon and Vladimir, them and Godot, them and the setting, and Pozzo and Lucky. Lucky. Friendship One lighthearted aspect of this play is the strong bond between Estragon and Vladimir. I personally  believe that their love for each other keeps them at the tree day da y after day just as much as Godot does. Man as a Dog or Other Animal Many critics comment on the repeated references of Beckett's characters as animal like, especially that of a dog. This is meant to be a degrading comparison. The Deterioration of Intelligence From Pozzo's pedantic speech in act one to his eventual blindness in act two, there is a literal and symbolic deterioration of intelligence. An even better example of this is Lucky's monologue. Boots and Hats Estragon –  Estragon – being being the more practical, grounded of the tramps –  tramps –  looks to his boots while Vladimir  –   –   being the more philosophical one –  one – looks looks to his hat. There is range of critical explanations behind the symbolism of these objects. Beckett has also recognized the importance of boots in the play. 7 (70) Music-hall and Circus Influence The bowler hats, physical ph ysical comedy, “cross“cross-talk” speech patterns, and comedic misunderstandings misunderstandings all 18 have roots in the music-hall and circus. “They give birth astride of a grave,...” “...the light gleams an instant, then it's night once more” “Astride of a grave and a difficult birth. Down in the hole, lingeringly, the gravedigger puts on the forceps.” This is one of the most famous quotes from “Waiting “Waiting for Godot”. It is attributed to the influenced of a speech given by Carl Jung while Beckett was receiving psychiatric help. Beckett was greatly influenced by a particular story in Jung's speech, and references to “never being properly born” are seen throughout his work: “Recently I saw a case of a little girl who had some of the most amazing mythological dreams. Her father consulted me about these dreams. I could not tell him what I thought  because because they contained an uncanny un canny prognosis. The girl had died later of an infectious disease. She had never been born entirely.” 17 (127) Loss of Train of Thought Through the entire book, all characters experience losses in their train of thought. This may have been added as support for the deterioration of intelligence motif.

Discussion Questions On the play itself: 1. Do you agree with Vivian Mercer's infamous quote –  quote – Beckett Beckett “has written a play in which nothing happens, twice”? 2. Who do think thing Godot is? 3. What role do Pozzo and Lucky play? How does their relationship compare to that of Vladimir  and Estragon? 4. Have you ever experienced the sort of stasis Estragon and Vladimir are in, just waiting? 5. How would this play be more or less effective if it was only one act? 6. What does this play say about humanity? 7. Is this play timeless? If so, what factors keep it from becoming outdated? 8. How does the relationship between Vladimir and Estragon compare with the relationship  between Pozzo and Lucky? 9. Do Vladimir and Estragon develop as characters over the course of the play? 10. This play has been met with wide range of reactions, as described in the production history in this study guide. Why do you think people react so differently? On this production: 1. What did you feel while watching the play? Did you feel any differently during each act? 2. What did you make of Lucky's speech? The other characters were greatly disturbed by it; were you? 3. Did you ever feel that the actors/characters were conscious of the audience? 4. Beckett had on multiple occasions stopped or denounced productions of “Waiting for Godot” with female cast members.3 (93) In what ways does having an almost all female cast change the dynamics of the play? Does it at all? 5. “Waiting “Waiting for Godot” has a very particular very particular type of comedy, which can only be portrayed with great skill from the actors. a ctors. The dialogue is constantly constan tly wavering between hilarity, absurdity, absurdity, and seriousness. How did the actors use body language, voice inflection, and silence to make this  production funny? 6. How did the set and lighting contribute to this production? 7. If given the chance, chanc e, would you see “Waiting “Waiting for Godot” again?

Places for Further Reading Samuel Beckett has written a lifetime worth of plays, novels, poems, short stories, films, radio plays, critical analysis, and essays. Here is a brief list of Beckett's most famous works:4          

  

 

1932 DREAM OF FAIR TO MIDDLING WOMEN (novel -- unpublished until 1992) 1938 MURPHY (novel -- French translation 1947) 1951 MOLLOY (novel in French -- English translation 1955) 1951 MALONE MEURT (novel -- English translation, MALONE DIES, 1956) 1952 EN ATTENDANT GODOT 1953 L'INNOMMABLE (novel -- English translation, THE UNNAMABLE, 1958). 1953 WA WATT (novel in English -- written 1942-45; 1942- 45; French translation 1968) 1957 FIN DE PARTIE PARTIE (one-act play pla y -- English translation, ENDGAME, E NDGAME, 1958) 1957 ACTE SANS PAROLE PAROLE I (mime -- English translation, ACT WITHOUT WORDS WORDS I, 1958) 1958 KRAPP'S LAST TAPE (play for one character and tape recorder -- French translation, LA DERNIÈRE BANDE,1959) 1961 COMMENT C'EST (novel -- English translation, trans lation, HOW IT IS, 1964) 1961 HAPPY DAYS DAYS (play in two acts -- French translation, trans lation, OH LES BEAUX JOURS, 1964) 19 64) 1963 ACTE SANS PAROLE PAROLE II (mime, written 1957 -- English translation, ACT WITHOUT WORDS II, 1959) 1964 PLAY PLAY (one-act play -- French translation, COMÉDIE, 1964. Film adaptation, adap tation, 1966) 1970 MERCIER ET CAMIER (novel, written 1945-46 -- English translation, MERCIER AND CAMIER, 1974)

Looking for more Theater of the Absurd? Check  out: Want to know more about Beckett and “Waiting for Godot”? Look for: Eugene Ionesco Samuel Beckett: A Biography by Deirdre The Chairs Bair  Rhinoceros Damned to Fame: The Life of Samuel Albert Camus Beckett by James Knowlson Knowlson The Stranger  The Letters of Samuel Beckett Bloom's Modern Critical Interpretations: The Fall Waiting for Godot edited by Harold Bloom Jean Genet The Theatrical Notebooks of Samuel The Maids Beckett: Waiting Waiting for Godot The Balcony The Grove Companion to Samuel Beckett: A The Blacks Reader's Guide to His Works, Works, Life, and Martin Esslin Thought by C. J. Ackerly and S. E. Gontarski The Theatre of the Absurd (nonfiction) 

◦

◦







◦

◦

 



◦

◦

◦



◦







http://www.samuel-beckett.net/

Bibliography 1. "Samuel Beckett - Biography." Samuel Beckett. European Graduate School EGS, 1997-2012. Web. 03 Feb. 2013. 2. Rick. "Rick On Theater Theate r." : History of 'Waiting For Godot' N.p., 30 Mar. 2009. Web. Web. 03 Feb. 2013. 3. Hutchings, William. Samuel Beckett's Waiting Waiting for Godot: A Reference Guide. Westport, CT: Praeger, 2005. Print. 4. Feterman, Raymond. "The Imagery Museum of Samuel Beckett by Raymond Federman." The Imagery Museum of Samuel S amuel Beckett by Raymond Federman. Fede rman. N.p., n.d. Web. 03 Feb. 2013. 5. Esslin, Martin. "The Search for the Self." 1961. Samuel Beckett's Waiting for Godot. Ed. Harold Bloom. New York: York: Chelsea House, 1987. 23-40. Print. 6. Ruby Ruby,, Cohn. "W "Waiting." aiting." 1973. Samuel S amuel Beckett's Waiting Waiting for Godot. Ed. Harold Bloom. New York: Chelsea House, 1987. 41-51. Print. 7. Gilman, Richard. "The Waiting Waiting Since." 1972. Samuel Samu el Beckett's Waiting Waiting for Godot. Ed. Harold Bloom. New York: York: Chelsea House, 1987. 1 987. 67-78. Print. P rint. 8. States, Bert O. "The Language of Myth." 1978. Samuel Beckett's Waiting Waiting for Godot. Ed. Harold Har old Bloom. New York: York: Chelsea House, 1987. 1 987. 79-94. Print. P rint. 9. Conley, Conley, Tim. "Beckett - Biography Biograph y." Beckett - Biography. Biography. N.p., 15 Mar. 2001. Web. Web. 03 Feb. 2013. 10. Orend, Karl. "How "Ho w Beckett Was." Thesis. 2003. Weekly Weekly Book Reviews and Literary Analysis from the Times Literary Supplement. Web. 03 Feb. 2013. 11. Bloom, Harold. "Introduction." "Introdu ction." Introduction. Samuel S amuel Beckett's Waiting for Godot. New York: York: Chelsea House, 1987. 1-10. Print. 12. Gans, Eric. "Beckett and the Problem of Modern Culture." 1982. Samuel Beckett's Waiting for  Godot. By Harold Bloom. New York: York: Chelsea House, 1987. 95-110. Print. 13. Kern, Edith. "Beckett's Modernity and Medieval Affinities." 1983. Samuel S amuel Beckett's Waiting Waiting for Godot. By Harold Bloom. New York: York: Chelsea House, 1987. 111-18. Print. 14. Sarkar, : Kumaraditya. "The Disputed Identity of Godot." IndiaStudyChannel.com. N.p., 16 Apr. Apr. 2010. Web. 03 Feb. 2013. 15. Ben-Zvi, Linda. Samuel Beckett. Boston: G.K. G.K. Hall & Co., 1986. 1986 . 16. Samuel Beckett. Digital image. Harry Harr y Ransom Center RSS. N.p N.p.,., n.d. Web. Web. 04 Feb. 2013. 17. Thurston, Luke. "Outselves: Beckett, Bion And Beyond." Journal Of Modern Literature 32.3 (2009): 121-143. Academic Search Sear ch Premier. Web. Web. 4 Feb. 2013. 18. "Comic and Farcical Far cical Elements in Waiting for Godot | Learn English, IELTS, EFL,ESL Public Speaking, Grammar, Literature, Linguistics by NEO." Comic and Farcical Elements in Waiting for Godot | Learn English, IELTS, IELTS, EFL,ESL Public Speaking, Speakin g, Grammar, Literature, Linguistics by NEO. N.p., 4 Dec. 2010. Web. 04 Feb. 2013.