Glorious Notes

On

WAITING FOR GODOT

FOR

M.A ENGLISH PART II

Compiled By

IFTIKHAR AHMAD TARAR

(M.Phil. Linguistics)

03349395715

SUPERIOR COLLEGE SAMBRIAL

 EXISTENTIALISM IN “WAITING FOR GODOT”
“Waiting for Godot” is a play in which Samuel Beckett adopted the doctrine of existentialism.
Critics call it one of the prominent existentialist plays that demonstrate theme of existentialism
as main story of the play. However, certain elements are there in it that reveal theme of
nihilism too. Nihilism and existentialism are two distinct things still it seems that Samuel
Beckett combined them in order show superiority of Existentialism. Some of the critics are of
the opinion that “Waiting for Godot” is neither entirely on existentialism nor entirely on
nihilism but somewhere in between.
Jean Paul Sartre and Martin Heidegger presented theory of existentialism in which they stated
that humans had been thrown in a meaningless universe in which they had no purpose at all.
They were put in absurd situation by an unknown force and were living in mental pains and
sufferings. Life is terrible or not, it is not the topic relevant to theory of existentialism. Hence,
main reason behind sufferings of humans is not the terrible world but that they are freely living
in it. They are free to choose but irony is that no choice is given to them but existentialism
believes that even not making a choice is a choice. In concise words, existentialism is theory
that believes “man is what he does”.
“Waiting for Godot” is indeed a play that demonstrates theme of existentialism. Two main
characters of the play named as Vladimir and Estragon are put into an absurd situation just like
humans have been put in the world without any purpose. In whole play they do nothing to
change their miserable condition. Existentialism emphasizes on the practice of doing something
and creating a purpose while accepting existence in this world. Hence, they have freewill to
make their life better. They can come out of this situation and can give their lives a meaning but
they do nothing. Estragon’s dialogue is notable in this regard. He says:
“Nothing happens, nobody comes, nobody goes, it’s awful.”
He knows that his situation is awful yet he does nothing to make it better.
Nihilism means nothing. It determines that humans exist in this world is enough. They should
not do anything because everything they do is meaningless. “Waiting for Godot” portrays
theme of despair as well as concept of nihilism. Estragon and Vladimir do nothing. Play starts
with nothingness and ends with nothingness.
Still this play does not promote theory of nihilism. Two tramps do nothing even then they are
doing something. They are waiting for Godot. They have set a purpose for them through which
they accept their existence. Furthermore, they are finding their identities. They are unable to
find answers of their questions and the only reason due to which they are not successful is that
they are confused.
In addition, they are Christian by religion and believe on existence of god which is opposite to
the concept of nihilism. Theory of existentialism also does not believe on existence of God.
However, there is a type of existentialism that do so. It is called “Christian Existentialism”.
“Waiting for Godot”, in this way, demonstrates this type of existentialism.
Believing on existence of God does not change meaning of existentialism. Characters are finding
their purpose in this world. They want answers of their questions like who they are and why
they are here? It is, therefore, Estragon says:
“We always find something, eh Didi, to let us think we exist.”
“Waiting for Godot” is a situation that has no begging and no end. Tramps don’t know about
their past nor are they sure about their future. It is a situation which every person in the world
facing. Samuel Beckett also said the same. In his eyes, we are all like Estragon and Vladimir.
Furthermore, he is of the view that the play is more about waiting. Thus, it is true that they are
living in an absurd world that is one of the major characteristics of existentialism.
They go on living. They know pointlessness of their existence still they don’t give up on life. It is
main problem that no one is here to answer the question of human existence in this world.
Same is the case with protagonists of the play; they are waiting for Godot. It is the only way
through which they would know purpose of their lives.
Besides, we see that Estragon and Vladimir are living a miserable life not because life is the
name of pains instead because they are free. It is also a problem that humans have been given
freewill. Lucky is satisfied with his life as compared to Estragon and Vladimir. Though his life is
tough yet he does not consider it tough. A purpose has been set for him by his master. On the
other hand, Estragon and Vladimir have no purpose. Freewill is their problem.
They portray a universal problem. Humans are living in this world but why are they living? No
one has exact answer of this question. It would have been easier for us if our goals were set.
 Freewill is our main problem because it has become our duty to find purpose of life. It is
primary meaning of existentialism. Samuel Becket clearly shows it in “Waiting for Godot”
through Estragon and Vladimir.
Simplest definition of existentialism is that “humans define their own meaning in life, and try to
make rational decisions despite existing in an irrational universe”. The definition can be divided
into three parts.
• Universe is irrational
• Humans existence in it and
• Humans define meanings of life with rational decisions.
If so, then “Waiting for Godot” frankly promotes theory of existentialism. Estragon and Vladimir
are existing in irrational world, and they have defined meanings of their lives i.e. “waiting for
Godot”. He would come and answer them. They are loyal to their purpose. Even otherwise, if
that is not their purpose then Samuel Beckett intimates us that instead of waiting for Godot
one should set purpose of his life and existentialism also suggests the same.
Existentialism deals with individual existence, freedom and choice. “Waiting for Godot”
presents the same notion due to which it is called “a play that advocates theory of
existentialism”.
Suffice is to say that there are two aspects of the play through which it can be seen. Firstly, it
shows theme of despair and nihilism. Secondly, “Waiting for Godot” promotes philosophy of
existentialism. However, majority of the dialogues, settings, actions [useless actions] reveal that
existentialism is the main theme of “Waiting for Godot”.
 THEMES IN WAITING FOR GODOT
Theme is an idea that pervades a novel, play or poem. “Waiting for Godot” contains much
complex and interesting themes. Samuel Becket wrote this play with a new style but his
thematic concept was not different form other writers. However, there is a kind of diversity in
themes of “Waiting for Godot”. Lots of subjects are covered in this play. Its single theme
“nothing to be done” gets good attention. Samuel Becket shows a purposeless life. It does not
have any story or plot; therefore, success of “Waiting for Godot” is dependent only on its
remarkable themes. The major themes in “Waiting for Godot” are, Nothing to be done,
Importance of hope, Sufferings, Absurdity, Difference in human race, Relationship and
Existentialism.
“Nothing to be done” is one of the most criticized themes of “Waiting for Godot”. Vivian
Mercier once said:
‘’It is a play in which nothing happens twice”.
We can’t deny that nothing happens in this play. Estragon and Vladimir enter on stage talk,
perform useless actions and exit. Second act is a copy of first act with minute difference of
dialogues. In whole play one asks a question to the other “what to do?” Other replies “nothing
to be done”. It also starts with the same dialogue. Play goes on depicting this theme and finally
ends with nothingness.
Symbolically, this theme has much importance. It defines the journey of life; a journey from
nothingness to nothingness. We come in the world but what is our purpose here? What is our
identity? Samuel Becket does not answer these questions instead he asks from the audience.
He himself does not know their answers. Every person in this world is like Estragon and
Vladimir, who is waiting for something but most of the time he cannot get what he wants and
life ends just like the play ends. Both acts of the play end with despair. In this way, life is
meaningless for them. Actually, life is a journey from nothingness to nothingness. It is much
difficult to understand meaninglessness. Let’s try to understand situation of Estragon and
Vladimir with an example.
A person has been waiting for train for five minutes on railway station. After five minutes train
arrives and he leaves. His five minutes were meaningless because in that time “he had nothing
to be done”. It should be remembered that there is a difference between “nothing done” and
“nothing to be done”. “Nothing done” strengthens theory of existentialism.
The next theme in the play is importance of hope. Without hope, there is nothing in life. Optimism
comes to an end without it. Thus, hope is necessary if one wants to live. This play also depicts
this important theme. It forces us to think twice on the importance of hope. Estragon and
Vladimir has nothing to be done yet they are hopeful. It is only hope due to which they are alive
and waiting for Godot. “Godot” may be a help or maybe God but one thing is clear that both of
them are hopeful about their future. They think that Godot will come and change their lives.
The play ends with nothingness but “wait and hope” never ends. Estragon and Vladimir will
come again tomorrow at the same place and will wait for Godot until his arrival. In this way,
hope is one of the major themes of “Waiting for Godot”. .
Suffering also falls in category of major themes of “Waiting for Godot”. We witness sufferings
of Vladimir and Estragon in this play. They are living a miserable life. Estragon has been beaten
by strangers every night but he is helpless. God has created this world and has forgotten it after
its creation. It seems that Samuel Becket has given this message to the audience. Apart from
Estragon and Vladimir, Lucky is also suffering. His life is more miserable than them. Sufferings of
slavery class are evident in this play. We can say that Estragon and Vladimir are responsible for
their miserable condition but Lucky is a slave and he cannot help himself. Vladimir’s speech in
this context is helpful. He says:-
“Was I sleeping while the others suffered? Am I sleeping now?
Tomorrow, when I wake, or think I do, what shall I say of today?
Themes of absurdity and ridiculousness in “Waiting for Godot” are also dominated. Becket shows the
world a way of escaping from sufferings of life. Life can be spent like Estragon and Vladimir:
doing nothing, having irrational behavior, passing the ball and act ridiculously. Perhaps,
absurdity is the only way to get through life. This is also a method to avoid criticism as it has
been said that the best way to avoid criticism is to do nothing. While doing nothing and
repeating silly actions, one can pass seconds but not whole life. It seems that Becket has
preferred absurdity over existentialism. Anyhow, he has shown a way to go through life i.e.
absurdity.
Difference in human races is also evident in this play. This theme has importance of its own.
Lucky is a symbol of slavery class, whereas Pozzo refers feudalism. These characters present
two types of human races. One is miserable, whereas second is happy. Samuel Becket has
shown the inferiority of lower class and superiority of upper class.
Theme of Relationship is another important theme of “Waiting for Godot”. Samuel Becket
portrays different types of human relationships. There are four kinds of individuals in the play.
Every character is a separate entity. Individually, they refer something but in a relationship they
indicate something else. Vladimir’s problems are mental; Estragon’s physical. Pozzo and Lucky
are presented to show the two races of men. But when these individuals are put into relations,
they perform an important role.
“Existentialism” is the most important theme of “Waiting for Godot”. In order to understand
this theme we must have knowledge about theory of Existentialism. However, in simple words
it means that every person is responsible for his actions and no second person is pulling his
strings or controlling his fate. In other words (from oxford), existentialism emphasizes the
existence of the individual person as a free.
Estragon, Vladimir, Pozzo and Lucky: are they all free? Are they himself responsible for their
actions. Can’t say “Yes” nor can say “No”. Lucky is not free. A person who is slave from
childhood can’t do anything to change his life. People beat Estragon every night and he is
helpless.
Samuel Becket has not answered the above said questions. We see every character has freewill
yet some limitations are imposed on them. In case of Lucky, someone is pulling his strings
whereas in case of Pozzo, Estragon and Vladimir they are free.
In a nutshell, the “Waiting for Godot” has many remarkable themes. Samuel Becket has closely
observed life; therefore, every theme is related to life and reality. There are some other
important themes of this play such as: Religion, Mortality, Waiting, Ignorance and Impotence.
These Themes of “Waiting for Godot” directly strike minds of audience and give this play a good
success. It seems that Samuel Becket, very minutely and after experiments, has rendered
various themes in “Waiting for Godot”. Hence, there is no denying the fact that themes give
this play a striking success.
 WHO IS GODOT
In the play, Estragon and Vladimir await for the arrival of a mysterious character named Godot.
However, Godot never arrives. Therefore, the audience never actually learns who Godot truly
is. We never find out much about Godot; precisely who or what he is remains something of a
mystery throughout Beckett's landmark absurdist play. What's more, he never makes an
appearance on stage, which only serves to heighten the mystery further.
Yet a number of literary critics and scholars have, over the years, ventured to suggest that
Godot represents God, whose name forms the basis of his own. Godot is absent from stage,
waited for by the play's characters, in much the same way that God appears to be absent from
a dark, absurd, and meaningless world.
Beckett wrote his play at a time when existentialism was a popular pastime among a certain
section of the European intelligentsia, and the variant of existentialism to which they adhered
was thoroughly steeped in atheism, pervaded by a sense that there was no God and that
individuals had to create their own meaning in a Godless universe.
To a considerable extent, that is what Vladimir and Estragon try to do in Beckett's play while
they're waiting for a Godot, who never shows up. Their failure to do so can be seen as a
warning of just how difficult it can be for humans to endow the world around them with
meaning and significance in the absence of the divine.
In Beckett's popular absurdist play ‘’Waiting for Godot’’, the titular character never appears and
remains a mystery throughout the entire play. The main protagonists, Vladimir and Estragon,
are waiting for Godot to arrive, and the act of waiting itself is a choice they make consciously or
maybe even unconsciously.
Even though they are constantly informed by Godot's young messenger that Godot will not be
arriving, they still decide to wait for him, and this is where the absurd lies. Their waiting actually
symbolizes the quest for happiness and fulfillment—the people are wasting their time trying to
achieve their hopes and dreams, waiting for something good to happen to them, not realizing
that there's actually no real meaning to life. Godot is the metaphorical representation of this
lack of meaning, hence why he never actually arrives.
According to some critics and analysts, as well as readers, Godot might also be God, or rather
Beckett's interpretation of God. For instance, Vladimir and Estragon are not actively searching
for Godot, they're waiting for him to arrive, similar to how Christians await the arrival of the
Messiah. Didi and Gogo are waiting for Godot in the hopes that he will save them and they're
even worried that he might punish them if they stop waiting for him. Godot is also described as
a kind man with a white beard, which is similar to how God is presented in the Bible:
VLADIMIR: Has he a beard, Mr. Godot?
BOY: Yes Sir.
VLADIMIR: Fair or... or black?
BOY: I think it's white, Sir.
One can't help but notice, however, Beckett's pessimistic nature when it comes to describing
Godot and the meaninglessness of life, who through the character of Godot implies that this
long-awaited "savior" might never come to aid the people and deliver them from evil and
suffering and ultimately save their souls.
It is also notable to consider the possibility that Godot hasn't arrived yet simply because he is
already there—he's nowhere, and he's everywhere at the same time. Perhaps Godot is all of
the characters together, who fail to realize that they are the only ones who can actually
determine their path and create their own fate—that they're simply waiting for themselves to
take action and make a change in their lives.
In the play Waiting for Godot, the central characters, Estragon and Vladimir, wait for a
character named Godot, who never arrives. Godot is therefore a projection of the characters'
unrealized and at times vague hopes and dreams. While the characters often refer to waiting
for Godot, they cannot recall where they are supposed to meet him (other than knowing in a
vague sense that it's by a tree). At times they consider ending their lives but then decide to
continue to wait for Godot, though they cannot really determine the benefits or rewards of
doing so. Godot represents their vague sense that their lives will eventually have promise or
some type of meaning or conclusion, though it's unclear when this promise or conclusion will
arrive, if ever. Godot constantly promises to arrive but never actually does so. The vagueness of
Godot is one of the absurdist elements of the play and represents the idea that the meaning of
life is unclear and perhaps nonexistent.
Though it might not have been the intent of the question, this precise issue marks the purpose
of not only the play but of all existence. The character of Godot marks the driving force of the
Vladimir and Estragon because it is for whom they are waiting. Essentially, the purpose of both
characters, the reason why they are there, is to eagerly await the arrival or mere presence of
Godot. Beckett denies that Godot is "God." Of the many contradictions and complexities that
Beckett represented, it would be too simple to presume that the character of Godot would be
the higher force.
However, one can make the argument that Godot represents anything for which we are
waiting. Any external force that we believe will answer our queries, stop the pain of modern
insecurity, and provide the Sartrean "bad faith" answer of totality can be seen as "Godot." Both
characters believe that Godot will provide the answers, and that this faith in absolutism can be
what the character is meant to represent. It can be a religious force, a material object, a state
of being in the world, or anything that is perceived to alleviate the difficulty of living in the
modern setting.
 SYMBOLISM IN WAITING FOR GODOT

Beckett’s Waiting for Godot is full of symbolism including the names of characters like Vladimir
and Estragon, Lucky and Pozzo and even the hidden character; Godot. Symbolism, if simply
defined, is the use of some words, things or events without their apparent meaning rather
referring something else. The dominated symbols in the play are Tree, Lucky’s Baggage, Pozzo’s
Rope, Night Fall, Hat, Names, The Boot and The Bone.

The tree where the two characters, Vladimir and Estragon meet, is completely bare of leaves at
the beginning which represents the organic element of setting. This tree portrays the world as
barren or meaningless, lack of purpose. However, the apparent growth of leaves on tree in the
start of Act 2 still does nothing for the meaning of life. It only adds to the uncertainty about the
place and passage of time. Despite Vladimir’s description of tree in the play as; “covered with
leaves,” the stage direction specifies only “four or five” leaves. For some critics, the cross on
which Christ was crucified is sometimes called a tree. Vladimir and Estragon do discuss the tree
and hanging themselves in Act 1 when the two thieves crucified along with Christ. This means
that hanging from the tree draws parallel between them and thieves.

Lucky never puts down the items he carries, except when Pozzo orders him to do something.
He again picks it up without any reason. This action shows the human tendency of enslavement
and burdens which are unnecessary. The baggage contains mostly items for Pozzo’s comfort
but, in Act 2 it is revealed that the bag which is never opened in Act 1, contains sand. This is
another example of character “deadened” by a habit.

There are many interpretations of Pozzo and Lucky and their symbolic significance. According
to one interpretation, these two men represent a master and a slave. According to other
interpretations, Pozzo and Lucky symbolize the relationship between capital and labour, or
between wealth and artist. A group of critics finds an autobiographical origin: Pozzo
representing James Joyce and Lucky as Samuel Beckett. Another critic characterizes Pozzo as
the God of the Old Testament, the tyrant in Act-1 and the New Testament God, helpless,
crucified in Act-II.
In the play the particular word ‘Godot’ is deeply symbolic. Godot represents something godly
or godlike. He is the ‘earthly ideal of a better social order’. ‘Godot’ also means death or silence
and represents the inaccessible self. He stands for the mythical human being whose arrival is
expressed to change the situation. Two tramps wait for him and thus Godot represents an
event, a person, death. Godot’s white beard reminds us of the image of the old father aspect of
God. According to some other critics, he is an empty promise in a meaningless life. Another
view is that Godot represents silence. Godot may be a symbol of death. At last, perhaps Godot
means only something for which one waits vainly, some promise that remains unfulfilled, some
development that does not occur, some hope that does not materialize.
Lucky is a slave for his master Pozzo. Lucky is tied with rope, holding both master and slave
together. This is the symbol of distance between the God and his slave. However, when the
rope is short the distance between them is smaller. When Estragon and Vladimir try to hang
themselves with cord and it breaks, and they remind themselves to bring rope tomorrow. This
rope has same purpose as for Pozzo and Lucky.

While Estragon and Vladimir are waiting for Godot, they also wait for the nightfall. This nightfall
shows that darkness is like a death and falling of night is like to reprieve from daily suffering as
death is death to reprieve from life. Hat represents thinking, as the long monologue of Lucky in
Act 1 and stops when his hat is knocked off. Estragon and Vladimir also exchange their hats
with Lucky’s hat back and forth. This scene is the representation of instability of individual
identities and exchanging represents the exchange of identities.

Boot symbolizes daily life struggling and Estragon is the most affected by boots. He takes off
and putting again them on. This shows daily struggles in life which cannot be changed. While,
Bone is the symbol of poverty, the characters do not have enough food for themselves and
they beg for their survival. This shows the relationship between Feudalism or Capitalism who
has dominated over the poor.
Lucky’s dance also has symbolic significance in the play. When Lucky is commanded to dance
in Act I, Pozzo reveals that he calls his dance "The Net," adding, "He thinks he’s entangled in a
net." You would think a guy tied up on a rope leash would feel confined enough. Of course, the
image of Lucky writhing in an imaginary net is a lasting image for the play as a whole, and
especially for the plight of Vladimir and Estragon, who, as we’ve said before, are confined in a
prison – or perhaps a net – of their own imaginations.

Finally, the symbolism of Gogo and Didi “waiting” is also significant. At one point Gogo calls it
“hope deferred.” Both of the main characters are preoccupied with passing the time. It is
symbolic of how some people are so preoccupied with waiting for good things, bad things,
resurrection, death, the lives and choices of others, their own failings, etc. they never move
forward in life. The continual ramblings of Didi and Gogo trying to entertain themselves during
the “waiting,” exemplifies how people distract themselves from their own hopes and
dreams. Neither Didi nor Gogo come to any realizations about their lives throughout the course
of the play and this is shown in the final line "Yes, let's go." The statement gives the
expectation of movement, yet in the staging of waiting for Godot, neither Didi nor Gogo move.
 NOTION OF TIME IN WAITING FOR GODOT
It is a well-known fact that human beings strive to achieve various goals by structuring their
time. Samuel Beckett, in his landmark play, waiting for Godot, scrutinizes “the notion of time”
in order to present human condition in the light of an absurd universe.
Considered the fourth dimension of space, Time in Waiting for Godot represents duality of
change and changelessness. In doing so, Beckett strips his characters of all essences and depicts
them in their bare situation of existence. In the play, the couple that embodies the dual aspect
of time is that of Pozzo and Lucky. In Act I of the play, Pozzo is shown to be very particular
about time. He seems certain that he has travelled for six hours. But in Act II, his wonderful
sight changes to complete blindness. Lucky, too, transforms from a thinking/speaking animal to
a dumb automaton, unable to even groan.
In this way, time, as an agent of change, becomes a devitalizing process in which human beings
continue to waste and pine. This notion of time is reflected in Pozzo’s furious outburst in Act II,
as he declares how time passes between birth and death in a flash, and human condition
changes in an instant. Throughout the play we see repetitive actions with slight variations,
which in turn make us aware of passing of time. As time lapses, we are all changed, but without
any warning. This absurd universe has no logic; therefore, time as a changing agent has no logic
either.
However, the change with passage of time happens only at the level of individual existence. In
comparison to a vast universe, on the other hand, nothing changes because “nothing ever
happens”. This changelessness is transcribed into temporal circularity in the play. It is reflected
in a meaningless and repetitive circulation of seasons, days and hours. The linearity of time has
been punctured in the play by its circular stasis. The victims of this “accursed time” are Pozzo
and Lucky. In Act I, Pozzo calculates his life by clocks. But in Act II, with complete blindness, he
gains a deeper insight as he realizes that all his wanderings have got him nowhere. He, along
with his companion Lucky, remains in a state of perpetual wandering. Initially, Pozzo’s
wanderings give him a sense of satisfaction, for he feels that he is going somewhere – such as
to the fair – and hence his constant command “On!” It is his wanderings that render his life
meaningful.
But by Act II, he realizes, as does the audience, that all he does is to go round and round in a
circle. He is trapped in a constant state of ‘nowhere-nowhen’ (Hugh Kenner) that is
synonymous with all place and all times. Thus, the basic human condition remains the same
even with passage of time. Therefore, for Pozzo, time between tomb and womb passes in a
flash. His speech in Act II resonates Heideggar’s statement: ‘As soon as man is born, he is old
enough to die.’
Human life is such that there is nothing except fruitless repetition and there is no possibility of
transition taking place. Even Gogo and Didi are impacted by the circular stasis of time, which
seems virtually non-existent to them. As Didi reveals in his soliloquy in Act II, time for these
tramps is “lingering” and full of suffering, a notion of time that is different from that of Pozzo’s.
Wherever they are, day and night follow each other cyclically. In addition, they have hazy
memory and no future prospects, as they exist in a perpetual present. Vladimir, aghast,
exclaims:
“They all change, only we can’t.”
The tramps in the play enact the action of waiting through various activities and game playing,
but in vain. Sometimes time becomes ‘that double-headed monster of damnation and
salvation’ (Beckett, Proust) for them to delve on; sometimes time gives them the scope of
showering each other with courtesies; and at other times, the stagnant time is coped with by
abusing each other. Ultimately, all actions lose their significance as they are weighed on the
same scale in order to pass time.
Thus, time has become a habit – “a great deadener” – with the tramps, as it is circular and
repetitive. This habit keeps them in their comfort zone. Yet, time and again they are confronted
with their real situation, which leaves them in despair. Therefore, when Didi’s companion Gogo
indulges in another game-playing activity with Pozzo, that of exchanging courtesies, he feels left
out and is momentarily jolted out of his habit. This makes him conscious of the horror of
stagnant time as he says, “Time has stopped”.
It is discomfiting to feel the arbitrariness of everything in the vast universe. Yet there is no
escape from this situation as one exists in a void. In this way, time becomes for these tramps
‘‘An existential prison-house from which there is no escape’’.
In this universe, where time has become static, Didi and Gogo, like many human beings, leap
into bad faith by waiting for an intervention by God or Godot. However, God remains an elusive
concept that gives the tramps an opportunity to pass time, though it gives them no relief from
their absurd situation. Godot, too, remains an absence till the end of the play, thus, depriving
Didi and Gogo of any refuge from their existential trap.
The dual nature of time causes immense anxiety to Didi and Gogo who keep oscillating
between hope and despair, especially Didi. Full of hope, he leaves everything to future (“time
will tell”), yet at the end of each action he feels despair for uncertainty ensues hopeful thoughts
and there is “nothing to be done”. This uncertainty is interestingly exposed through the
reference to Saturday in Act I, when Gogo and Didi are discussing the specific day they are
supposed to meet Godot.
Estragon: You’re sure it was this evening?
Vladimir: What?
Estragon: That we were to wait.
Vladimir: He said Saturday. I think.
Estragon: But what Saturday?
And is it Saturday? Is it not rather Sunday?
This reference to Saturday recalls the Biblical story of Christ’s Crucifiction (on Friday) and
Resurrection (on Sunday). Saturday lends to uncertainty as it falls between Friday and Sunday.
On Saturday, one hopes for resurrection of a divine power, but nothing is for certain. Similarly,
for modern human beings, life is but a series of Saturdays when uncertainty prevails. This is the
cause of angst in modern human beings. In order to deal with this anguish, one lapses into
rituals and routines. And that is how one copes with the “accursed time”. Here we are
reminded of Hamlet’s angst:
‘Time is out of joint, O cursed spite. If ever I was born to set it right’.
Modern human beings feel the pricks of time in the same way as Shakespeare’s Hamlet does,
but have no hope to set it right, for them there is “nothing to be done”. Beckett’s genius lies in
depicting this situation of every human being through his art, and Waiting for Godot is a prime
example of the same.
 BECKET’S USE OF LANGUAGE IN “WAITING FOR GODOT”
In “Waiting for Godot” Becket’s use of language is designed to devalue language as a vehicle of
conceptual thought or as an instrument for the communication.
In a meaningless universe, it is always foolhardy to make a positive statement. Ten different
modes of the breakdown of language have been noted in play. They range from simple
misunderstanding and double intenders to monologues, (as signs of inability to communicates)
cliché’s repetitions of synonyms, inability to find the right words and telegraphic style of
language (loss to grammatical structure), to luckys’ farrago of chaotic nonsense and dropping of
punctuation marks, such as question marks, as an indication that language as lost its function as
a mean of communication.
Waiting for Godot can also be regarded as a play that have meaningless language, because
neither it makes a (considerable) use of dream and fantasy nor it employs conscious poetic
language.
“Nothing happens, nobody comes, nobody goes it’s awful”.
There is no exposition, complication, climax denouement and resolution. The play does not
have any cathartic effect, language shows incompleteness of everything. Language is as blank
everywhere that even the end of play could be beginning of any act and so on. There is no
perpetuity that can feels through language:
Estragon: Let’s hang ourselves immediately!
Vladimir: From a bough
Estragon: We can always try
Vladimir: Go ahead
Estragon: After you
In play, the use of language probes the limitations of language the both as a means of
communication and as a vehicle for expression of valid statements, an instrument of thought.
His use of dramatic medium shows that’s he has tried to find means of expression beyond
language.
On the stage one can dispense with words altogether, or at least one can reveal the reality
behind the words, as when the action of the character contradict their verbal expression.
“Let’s go” say the two tramps at the end of each Act of waiting for Godot, but the stage
direction informs as that “They don’t move”.
On the stage language can be put into such a relationship with action that facts behind the
language can be revealed. Becket’s use of stage is an attempt to reduce the gap between the
limitations of language and the sense of human situation he seeks to express inspite of his
strong feeling that words as inadequate to formulate it.
Language in Becket’s plays serves to express the breakdown of language. Where there is no
certainty, there can be no define meanings and the impossibility of ever attaining certainty is
one of the main themes in plays for instance in play, the conversation between two characters
proves emptiness of language.
Vladimir: We’re waiting for Godot
Estragon: Ah! You’re sure it was here?
Vladimir: What?
The first statement in Waiting for Godot is Estragon’s pessimistic conclusion that there is
“Nothing to be done and paradoxically, in parts of the play Vladimir and estragon dialogue also
shows the blankness of language. The clear example of this sentiment is Vladimir’s statement,
“Let us do something” and another hand. Vladimir refuses to listen to account of Estragon,
nightmares saying “Don’t Tell Me” By contradicting each other and by questioning each other is
categorical instance of vacuity of language.
“Waiting for Godot” is based on passing the words. Characters talks and even in ordinary words
sum up the entire universe. There is hardly any dialogue, in the play, which is longer than a
sentence. If there is any, it is concise and clear. Although sentence of every dialogue is short yet
it is not short so far as its meaning is concerned. Characters argue with each other but
apparently there dialogues are not philosophical. Every dialogue, in the play, is not based on
numerous themes related to life, death and religion but they are dependent on the mind of
spectator/reader. It depends on the knowledge and experience as well as thinking capacity of
the audience that which meaning is being drawn while watching the play.
Becket has created a situation which is definitely experienced by everyone at least once in life,
therefore, truth is attached to it. Language of the play is simple yet a clever mind is required to
understand it. Moreover, not everyone draws the same meaning from the dialogues of this
play. Each and every mind considers the sense of this play differently because it is dependent
on experience and knowledge of the viewer. Samuel Becket once asked what does “Waiting for
Godot” meant for. He replied:-
“If I knew, I would have said so in the play”.
The writer very cleverly answered the question. He has mentioned in the play the purpose of
writing this play but a mastermind is required to find the purpose for which the play has been
written. We see two characters pass times by playing different games. Even, to pass the time,
they play a game, in which they abuse each other. Samuel Becket has some limitations while
writing plays. “Joyce” and “Waiting for Godot” are significant examples of it. Most of the
dialogues are repeated again and again in the plays but the thing, which is remarkable, is that
with every repetition of the dialogue, its meaning changes.
The crux of the above discussion is that there is no shame in the eyes of Beckett to devalue a
language. He is definitely unconventional and does not want to follow the rules of any tragedy
and language. Whether it is English or French, every language is moulded in a way by Becket
that it creates magnificence for the viewers. It is only Beckett, who can write a drama without
any setting, action, plot and characterization. His plays have only language in form of dialogues
and meanings attached to it; therefore, he skillfully and masterly uses it. He is master in shaping
language and shows it in his plays. Since the truth is attached to the statement,
“Yet, if Beckett devalues language, he continues to use it and,
bilingually, to show a mastery of it”,
Therefore, it is totally acceptable.
 WAITING FOR GODOT AS A TRAGICOMEDY
Tragicomedy is a play which claims a plot apt for tragedy but which ends happily like a comedy.
The action is sometimes serious in theme, subject matter and tone but it seems to be a tragic
catastrophe until an unexpected turn in events brings out the happy ending. The characters of a
tragicomedy are noble but they are involved in improbabilities. In such a play tragic and comic
elements are mixed up together.
The English edition of “Waiting for Godot”, published in 1956 describes the play as a
“tragicomedy” in two acts. There are many dialogues, gestures, situations and actions that are
stuff of pure comedy. All musical devices are employed to create laughter in such a tragic
situation of waiting. The total atmosphere of the play is very akin to dark-comedy. For example,
Vladimir is determined not to hear Estragon’s nightmare. The latter pleads with him in vain to
hear him, saying that there is nobody else to whom he may communicate his private
nightmares. The audience burst out in laughter when they see Estragon putting off and on his
boots.
Vladimir’s game with his hat appears as if this is happening in a circus. Vladimir is suffering
from prostrate problem. Vladimir's way of walking with stiff and short strides is as funny as
Estragon’s limping on the stage. Estragon’s gestures of encouraging Vladimir to urinate off-
stage are farcical. The comedy in this play at certain times gives the impression of Vaudeville.
There are many dialogues which occur like a comic paradigm in the play. To cite an example the
following conversation may be quoted:
Estragon: Let’s go.
Vladimir: We can not.
Estragon: Why not?
Vladimir: We are waiting for Godot.
(They do not move.)
Again, Estragon and Vladimir put on and take off each other’s hat as well as that of Lucky again
and again. It shows that in the world of tramps, there is no place of significant actions. The most
farcical situation in the play is the one where the tramps are testing the strength of the cord
with which they wish to hang themselves. The cord breaks under the strain. One cannot have
an uninhabited laugh at the situation for there is also something deeply uncomfortable.
“Waiting for Godot” has several moments of anguish and despair. We are told that someone
beats Estragon daily. Estragon’s feet and Vladimir’s kidneys are also taken to be granted. The
tramps resent that they should be asked whether it still hurts. It goes without saying that it
hurts all the time. When Vladimir asks Estragon whether his boots are hurting him, he
responds:
Hurts! He wants to know if it hurts!
A little later Estragon asks Vladimir about his kidney trouble and the latter replies in the same
words: Hurts! He wants to know if it hurts! In fact his trouble is so bad that it does not even
permit him to laugh. Life lies all bleak and barren before them and that only valid comment on
it is the one with which the play opens, “Nothing to be done”. Theirs is a world of negation in
which inactivity is the safest course; as Estragon says:
Do not let us do anything, it’s safer.
The tramps are living at the barest level of existence. Carrot, turnips and radishes are all they
have to eat. Estragon’s remarks show tragedy and helplessness:
Nothing happens, nobody comes, nobody goes, it’s awful.
Contextually, the situation of Lucky too is quite pathetic, especially in view of his glorious past,
as Pozzo describes it. His speech tells us that Lucky must have brooded deeply over the anguish
of the human situation.
The comedy in “Waiting for Godot” at once turns into tragedy when the audience thinks about
the helplessness of tramps. Estragon and Vladimir are waiting for someone who never comes.
In order to pass time they indulge in irrelevant, meaningless activity. The element of force fades
away and miserable condition of man looms large in our imagination. Their life can be
compared with that of a prisoner for whom there is no escape, even suicide is impossible. Every
activity is a mockery of human existence. The changing of farce into absurdity brings a lot of
tragic sentiment in the play. Estragon’s nakedness is a picture of ‘man’s miserable condition’.
The absurd living is a major source of tragedy. The source is the situation of pointless waiting of
Estragon and Vladimir. They do not know who Godot is. They are sure neither about the time
nor about the place of their appointment. They even do not know what will happen if they stop
waiting. Lack of essential knowledge makes them totally impotent and powerless. They are
glued to a situation.
Nothing is certain and all they can say is “Nothing to be done”. The total effect of the play is
therefore the co-mingling of tragic and comic elements, which in turn suggests that Samuel
Beckett was a realistic dramatist who looked at life from a position of a pessimist and an
optimist. The form of tragicomedy is highly suitable to this vision of life. The climax of Beckett’s
tragicomedy is the role of Lucky. He is wearing servant’s vest while holding his master’s
overcoat, a basket and a stool. His neck is tied with one end of the rope. His appearance is not
only fantastic but grotesque too. The moment we realize that he is a half-wit; he becomes an
image of man’s misery. We are all the more sorry for Lucky when it is revealed that Pozzo has
learnt all the beautiful things of life from lucky.
But now Pozzo is taking the same person to sell in a fair. The relationship of a ringmaster and
his trained animal, changes into a relationship of an owner and a slave. It is an exploitation of a
man by a man who stops the audience from bursting out into laughter. Comedy has been
checked by tragic element or sentiments, while the effect of tragedy has been mitigated by
farce created through characters, dialogues, gestures and actions. We can sum up with the
remarks of Sean O’ Casey,
“Beckett is a clever writer, for within him there is no hazard of hope; no desire for it; nothing
in it but a lust for despair and a crying of woe, not in a wilderness, but in a garden.”

IMPORTANT QUOTATIONS

Waiting for Godot

ACT I

1. Nothing to be done.

2. Never neglect the little things of life.

3. One of the thieves was saved it is a reasonable percentage.

4. It will pass the time.

5. I have nothing to say to you.

6. Personally I would not even know him if I saw him.

7. He wants to impress me, so that I will keep him.

8. He is bleeding. It is a good sign.

9. Nothing happens, nobody comes, nobody goes, it’s awful.

10. That passed the time.

11. He beats my brother, sir. Ah, you have a brother?

Yes sir. What does he do? He minds the sheep sir.

12. Tomorrow everything will be better.

13. No nothing is curtain

14. Well, shall we go? Yes, let’s go. They do not move.

ACT II

1. Do not touch me, do not question me, do not speak to me, stay with me.

2. Recognize? What is there to recognize?

3. Its Godot. A t last, Gogo. Its Godot. We are saved. Let’s go and meet him.

4. How time flies when one has fun.

5. Yes, in this immense confusion one thing alone is clear, we are waiting for Godot to come.

6. In an instant all will vanish and we will be alone once more, in the midst of nothingness.

7. The blind have no notion of time. The things of time are hidden from them too.

8. He does nothing sir.

9. Well, shall we go? YES, let’s go. They do not move.

( Iftikhar Ahmad Tarar 03349395715)