Waiting for Godot by Samuel Beckett

🌫✨Vladimir: Well, shall we go? Estragon: Yes, let’s go. They do not move. ✨🌫

Waiting for Godot is a representative play of the theatre of the absurd and is a landmark in modern drama. The play is without any plot, character, dialogue and setting in the traditional sense. In this play, Beckett expresses his personal view of the human condition through symbolism which has its root in the Christian Myth and Existential Philosophy. In Waiting for Godot, Beckett deals with the absurdity of man’s existence in this world of nothingness- the play is literally is about nothing.

The setting of the play creates the absurdist mood- a desolate country road, a ditch, and a leafless tree make up the barren, otherworldly landscape. In the very opening scene of the play, two tramps enter, dressed in rags, bowler hats, and apparently oversized boots; Vladimir and Estragon are waiting for Godot, an enigmatic figure who will decide their destiny, relieve them of the responsibility of living. They are not too sure whether they really have this appointment, nor whether this is the place or the time that has been agreed. They are dependent on each other and yet want to get away from each other. There is a surplus of symbolism and thematic suggestion in this setting; for example, The tree, usually a symbol of life with its blossoms and fruit or its suggestion of spring, is apparently dead and lifeless.

In the traditional sense, a plot should concentrate on a single motivated action and is also expected to have a beginning, a middle and a neatly tied-up ending. But it’s almost impossible to provide a conventional plot summary of Waiting for Godot- it is formless and not constructed on any structural principles. It starts at an arbitrary point and seems to end just as arbitrarily. Beckett is not trying to "tell a story." He's not offering any easily identifiable solutions to problems; there's no obvious "message." The pattern of the play might best be described as circular.

A well-made play is expected to present characters that are well-observed and convincingly motivated. But here, there are five characters who are not like “normal” human beings and don’t engage themselves in any motivated action. They argue, makeup, contemplate suicide, discuss passages from the Bible, and encounter Pozzo and Lucky, a master and slave. Near the end of the first act, a young boy comes with a message from Mr. Godot that he will not come today but will come tomorrow. In the second act, the action of the first act is essentially repeated but with a few changes- the tree, now, has leaves, Pozzo is blind and has Lucky on a shorter leash. Once again the messenger boy comes and tells them Ms Godot will not come today. When Vladimir asks the boy if he knew him and Estragon, the boy insists he has never met them before.

In the traditional play is expected to entertain the audience with logically built, witty dialogue. But in this play, the dialogue seems to have degenerated into meaninglessness. The dialogues the characters exchange are meaningless. They use language to feel the emptiness between them. The dialogues indicate the need to conceal the fact that they have no desire to talk to each other anything at all.

In conclusion, the whole play paints a picture of hopelessness. Neither time nor existence, neither reality nor memory or the past has any meaning or significance. Acts are meaningless, time does not flow consecutively, memory seems deceptive, existence is an impression or perhaps a dream and happiness is extremely and affliction is crystal clear through the situation of Vladimir and Estragon. They both embody the modern crisis that is existentialism.

This is a play not everyone will enjoy but for those who are familiar with the themes, this play is a must-read. You can find the movie easily on youtube. 🧡