Thinking Activity - Waiting for Godot

 Welcome to my Blog,

This blog is part of our study. This Thinking activity is based on Waiting for Godot was assigned by Dr. Dilip Barad sir Department of English MKBU. In this task, we have to give responses of Points to ponder based on our understanding of these concepts. 

Waiting for Godot

Introduction of Author:

Samuel Beckett- (1906-1989)

Samuel Beckett was born on April 13, 1906, in Foxrock, a suburb of Dublin, Ireland. He was the son of a wealthy builder and was raised in a Protestant family. Beckett was educated at Trinity College Dublin, where he studied French, Italian, and English literature. After graduation, he worked as a teacher and traveled extensively throughout Europe, settling in Paris in the late 1930s.

In Paris, Beckett became involved in the city's artistic and intellectual circles and began to write in French and English. His early works, including the novels "Murphy" (1938) and "Watt" (1953), and the play "Eleutheria" (1947), were heavily influenced by his interest in philosophy and the works of James Joyce.

However, it was not until the 1950s that Beckett achieved international recognition with his play "Waiting for Godot" premiere in Paris in 1953. This play, considered a landmark of the Theater of the Absurd movement, tells the story of two tramps waiting for a mysterious figure named Godot who never arrives. The play was a critical and commercial success and cemented Beckett's reputation as one of the leading playwrights of his generation.

In addition to "Waiting for Godot," Beckett wrote a number of other plays that explore themes of existentialism and the search for meaning in a meaningless world, including "Endgame" (1957), "Krapp's Last Tape" (1958), and "Happy Days" (1961). He also wrote several novels, including the highly regarded "Molloy" (1951), "Malone Dies" (1951), and "The Unnamable" (1953). Throughout his career, Beckett continued to explore new artistic avenues, including radio plays and television plays. He was also known for his strict control over the production of his works, often insisting on specific lighting and staging directions.

In 1969, Beckett was awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature for his "new forms of artistic expression, within the great European tradition." He continued to write and direct plays until his death on December 22, 1989. Samuel Beckett's contributions to literature and theater have had a lasting impact, and he remains one of the most important and influential playwrights of the 20th century.

Introduction of the play:

Waiting for Godot

"Waiting for Godot" is a play written by Samuel Beckett that was first performed in Paris in 1953. The play is considered a landmark of the Theater of the Absurd movement and is widely regarded as one of the greatest plays of the 20th century. The play follows the story of two tramps, Vladimir and Estragon, who are waiting by a tree for the arrival of a mysterious figure named Godot. As they wait, they engage in conversation, play games, and make attempts to pass the time. However, Godot never arrives and the two tramps are left in a state of suspended anticipation.

The play is notable for its sparse language, its exploration of existential themes such as the search for meaning and the human condition, and its portrayal of the passage of time. "Waiting for Godot" has been interpreted in many different ways, with some seeing it as a commentary on the meaninglessness of human existence and others as a reflection on the human need for hope and companionship. Regardless of interpretation, "Waiting for Godot" remains a classic of modern theater and continues to be performed and studied around the world.

Points to ponder:

1.1.  Why does Beckett grow a few leaves in Act II on the barren tree - The tree has four or five leaves?

The growth of leaves on the barren tree in Act II of Samuel Beckett's play "Waiting for Godot" can be interpreted as a symbol of hope and the passage of time. The appearance of leaves on the previously barren tree suggests that change and growth are possible, even in a seemingly desolate and hopeless situation. The growth of leaves can also be seen as a reminder of the cyclical nature of life and the inevitability of change. 

Leaves on the tree is open to interpretation and can vary depending on the individual reader or viewer's interpretation of the play.

1.2. 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'?

We can interpret the political reading in which Vladimir stands for Russia, Pozzo stands for Italy, Lucky stands for England and Estragon stand for France. So, we can connect this to the world war in which these all countries were destroyed by Godot means Germany that is why Vladimir asked the boy is Godot beating?

Germany stands for Godot. So we connect Godot with Germany means Hitler. Because he was ruling in Germany, 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 wait for Hitler to accept them.

1.3. In Act I, in reply to Boy’s question:

"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? What is the significance?

In Act II of "Waiting for Godot," the conversation between the Boy and Vladimir is similar to that in Act I. The Boy asks the same question: "What am I to tell Mr. Godot, Sir?" and Vladimir replies with the same words: "Tell him . . . (he hesitates) . . . tell him you saw us. (Pause.) You did see us, didn't you?"

The significance of this repetition lies in the recurring themes of the play, such as the cyclical nature of time, the futility of waiting, and the possibility that nothing has changed despite the passage of time. The repetition of the conversation highlights the sense of stasis and repetition in the lives of the characters, who are stuck in a seemingly endless cycle of waiting for Godot. 

1.4. In both Acts, evening falls into night and moon rises. How would you interpret this ‘coming of night and moon’ when actually they are waiting for Godot?

Beckett wants to highlight the indifferent nature. As Nature never waits for anyone, it doesn't matter whether a person was sad or happy, nature never cares for them. The natural process of the environment never stops for anyone. Similarly, in this play, Vladimir and Estragon wait for Godot, and in this process of waiting they do various things to pass their time, sometimes they feel totally disappointed.

The repetition of the evening falling into the night and the moon rising in both Acts of "Waiting for Godot" can be interpreted as a symbol of the passing of time and the inevitability of change. The characters are waiting for Godot, but despite their expectations and hopes, nothing seems to change and time continues to pass. The coming of night and the moon symbolize the changing of the day and the passing of time, reminding the characters that their waiting is fruitless and that time moves forward regardless of their desires.

The rising of the moon can also be interpreted as a symbol of hope and the unknown. The moon is often associated with mystery and the unknown, and its rising suggests the possibility of new beginnings and new possibilities. In the context of the play, this may represent the hope that Godot will eventually arrive, or it may symbolize the characters' yearning for something new and different in their lives.

The repetition of the coming of night and the moon in both Acts of "Waiting for Godot" serves to reinforce the themes of the passing of time and the futility of waiting, and adds a layer of symbolism to the play's exploration of the human condition.

1.5. What is the meaning of the terms ‘Apathia, Aphasia and Athambia’ in Lucky’s speech? “. . . divine apathia divine athambia divine aphasia loves us dearly with some exceptions for reasons unknown …”

Apathia (lacking emotion), athambia (being unflappable), and aphasia (an inability to speak or communicate) are crucial, add interesting nuance to the ideas of God that Beckett is referencing, or do little more than litter the speech. These are questions to address throughout all Lucky’s speech.

"Apathia" refers to a lack of emotion or feeling, and suggests that the characters are detached from their own experiences and are unable to feel any connection to the world around them.

"Aphasia" refers to a difficulty in using or understanding language, and suggests that the characters are unable to communicate their thoughts and feelings effectively. This ties into the play's themes of existential confusion and the futility of communication.

"Athambia" is a made-up term that appears to refer to a sense of confusion or existential disorientation. This adds to the sense of absurdity and the play's exploration of the human condition.

1.6. ‘A better solution to the tramp’s predicament than to wait – is, suicide”. Is it really so? Why they fail to commit suicide? 

In the play "Waiting for Godot," the characters of Vladimir and Estragon are in a predicament of waiting for the arrival of the mysterious Godot. The idea of suicide is raised as a potential solution to their situation, but it is not presented as a desirable or better option. Instead, the play suggests that their inability to take action, whether it be to end their lives or to leave their current situation, is a result of their lack of agency and purpose.

Furthermore, the characters' repeated failed attempts at suicide highlight the futility and meaninglessness of their existence. The play raises questions about the purpose of life and the human condition and suggests that the characters' struggle to find meaning is a universal one. The play ultimately portrays the characters' waiting and inability to take action as a commentary on the human condition and the lack of agency and purpose in a world without a clear meaning or direction.

1.7. Explain: “Godot might become as image of what Sartre calls “Bad Faith””.

In Jean-Paul Sartre's philosophy, "bad faith" refers to the phenomenon of self-deception and inauthenticity in which individuals hide from the truth of their existence and create false beliefs and values to avoid facing their freedom and responsibility. In the play "Waiting for Godot," the character's waiting for Godot can be interpreted as an example of bad faith. By waiting for Godot, the characters avoid taking action and making decisions about their lives, thereby hiding from the truth of their existence and the responsibilities that come with it.

The character's waiting for Godot can be seen as a manifestation of their desire for a higher power or authority to provide meaning and direction in their lives, rather than taking responsibility for their own existence. In this sense, Godot becomes an image of bad faith because the characters use their waiting as a way to avoid facing the truth of their situation and the reality of their freedom.

This play suggests that waiting for something or someone to provide meaning and direction is an example of bad faith, and that individuals must take responsibility for their own existence and make decisions about their lives based on their own values and beliefs.

1.8. Explain: “One hardly feels the absurdity of some things, on the one hand, and the necessity of those other things, on the other, (for it is rare that feeling of absurdity is not followed by the feeling of necessity), when one feels the absurdity of those things of which one had just felt the necessity (for it is rare that the feeling of necessity is not followed by the feeling of absurdity)”

This statement is exploring the idea of the paradoxical nature of human existence, particularly in regards to our understanding of what is absurd and what is necessary. It suggests that our perceptions of what is absurd and what is necessary can change, and that it is common to oscillate between these two feelings.

In essence, the statement is suggesting that the distinction between what is absurd and what is necessary is not always clear or absolute, and that these feelings can change and be reinterpreted depending on our experiences and perspectives. It highlights the uncertainty and ambiguity of the human experience and raises questions about the stability of our beliefs and values.

Thank you for visiting…

[Word count-2140]