Critically examining Samuel Beckett's "Waiting for Godot" as a part of the Theatre of Absurd

 

Written in the year 1952, Samuel Beckett’s Waiting for Godot, works as a paramount example in delineating the trivialities of life after the two World Wars, a time when the world was at its lowest point. It was first performed in the year 1953 and since has been regarded as one of the most famous works associated with the Theatre of Absurd. A term coined by Martin Esslin (Hungarian dramatist) in 1960, it was a movement which emerged in the mid-twentieth century (b/w 1940 & 1960) and explored the themes of meaninglessness or absurdity via seemingly superfluous human communications and circular plot narratives. For Esslin, the word “absurd” meant something which was ‘out of harmony with reason or propriety; illogical’, rendering man’s existence as irrational, hence, meaningless.

These “absurd” plays were a reaction to the failure of the moral, social, political as well as religious structures following the two World Wars. It suggested that life, after the wars had lost its purpose. Vladimir and Estragon, who are the protagonists in Waiting for Godot, spends the entire play (as the name suggests) waiting for someone named Godot, who never arrives. Their vane conversations and repetitive actions exemplify the absurdity and ridiculousness of human existence. The absence of Godot, who is an allegorical figure for God, symbolizes the uncertainty & the lack of coherent answers in life and the constant waiting marks a vain sense of hope which our two protagonists are clinging on to.

The plays in the Theatre of Absurd, like Beckett’s, were heavily inspired by certain themes or ideas which were the product of a new attitude that swept post-World War II Europe. After the industrial revolution, the European population was filled with aspirations/desires. The leaders of the times promised their people a secure world and were adamant in providing job security, opportunities to progress in lives and give their people a chance to move away from a livelihood they did not wish to be a part of. All these promises were thrown in the darkest pits of hell during the World Wars. Many people lost even the ability to hope because they thought that it was useless and that there was none left in the world. Families were broken. Millions and millions of people lost their lives and the ones who did survive, found themselves abandoned in the path to progress. The disparities between the rich and the poor became enormous. The people who found themselves in the excluded corners of the society, were the ones for whom life lost all its meanings and worth.

Beckett, like many other writers, put forward the realities of these people and the absurdity of life through avant-garde form of playwriting. The play, refrains from following a linear plot-progression, diverging from the traditional form of play-writings. The two acts of the play are strikingly similar, with little progress or development. The two characters repeat the same, monotonous actions, senseless conversations and finally decide to leave (but don’t) when the day is over, leading to no progress whatsoever. This cyclical narrative reflects the absurdist belief that life itself is repetitive and often without direction. The play brings forth no resolution, conclusion or even closure - neither for the characters, nor for the audience.          

Another aspect this absurdist play possesses is the fragmentation of language. The dialogues between Vladimir and Estragon are inadequate/insufficient in conveying meaning and are frequently non-sensical. The play does not provide any insight into the characters’ inner lives, their backstories or any psychological depth. It doesn’t embark a way for the audience to connect with them. This disintegration of language in the Theatre of Absurd, challenges the idea that language is a reliable means of expressing thoughts or understanding reality. In "Waiting for Godot," words fail to connect the characters meaningfully to their circumstances or even to each other, reinforcing the sense of isolation.                                     

The characters of Vladimir and Estragon are symbolic figures which represents all of humanity and its aimless wanderings in search for meaning. They blur their sense of self by forgetting about details of their own lives, reinstilling the idea of one’s purposeless existence or search for identity and existential dilemma.

Beckett employs the use of Black Humour in this work of his. It is a striking feature of the absurdist theatre where the characters’ situation is simultaneously tragic and funny. For example, the characters’ repeated attempts to hang themselves with a belt are treated with a mixture of humor and despair. The combination of comedy and tragedy heightens the absurd nature, leaving the audience unsure whether to laugh or be disturbed. The play reinforces the truth about life being both tragic and funny/happy.

Towards the end in both Act 1 & 2, a boy arrives with a message for Vladimir and Estragon, regarding Godot. He says, "Mister Godot told me to tell you he won't come this evening but surely tomorrow." The boy is then questioned by Vladimir about his work, to which the boy replies by saying that he tends to Godot's goats and his brother tends to his sheep. He also mentions how Godot beats his brother but never him and he doesn't know why.                    

This scene points out the tragic truth encompassing our world. The boy and his brother are very obvious metaphors, symbolising the rich and the poor. Godot being God, is hard on some people (the brother/poor) and the not others (the boy/rich) and nobody knows why. There are people who are born in wealth and stay in wealth all their lives. They are privileged enough to have everything one can desire, yet there are some who suffer and face hardships everyday. If all of us are children of God and are equal in front of Him then why is there so much inequality in the world? No one knows.

 Samuel Beckett’s Waiting for Godot, revolves around and embodies the central themes of existentialism, absurdity, and the breakdown of communication. Through its lack of conventional plot resolution and dark humour, the play illustrates the meaninglessness of human existence, making it one of the most enduring and thought-provoking examples of the absurdist movement.                                                                                                        

According to Delanie Laws (Indiana University), “Absurdist Theatre was heavily influenced by Existential philosophy. It aligned best with the philosophy outlined in Albert Camus’ essay The Myth of Sisyphus (1942).” Camus tries to present a reasonable answer as to why a person should not succumb to the depths of despair when their life seems hopeless and commit suicide. He uses the example of the Greek Mythological figure, Sisyphus, who was condemned to push a boulder up a mountain, only for it to roll back down, for eternity. At the end of the essay, Camus concludes that, “One must imagine Sisyphus happy” (Camus 123).                       

                                                                                                                   

He aims to make one understand that they should find happiness in the daily struggles of life. It’s a reminder that one exists and is alive.