Task on Waiting for Godot

This blog is part of my academic activity. To see task click here.

Waiting for Godot, tragicomedy in two acts by Irish writer Samuel Beckett, published in 1952 in French as En attendant Godot and first produced in 1953. Waiting for Godotwas a true innovation in drama and the Theatre of the Absurd’s first theatrical success.
(Taken from Britanica)

(1) What connection do you see in the setting (“A country road. A tree. Evening.”) of the play and these paintings? 
Setting of the play is A country Road and tree.  There is relics of fallen buildings. It shows the effect of world war, And presence of tree stand as presence of nature. Evening or fallen day is showing tragic element of life as Darkness take place of light same comedy turns into tragedy,
And the connection between the painting by Caspar David Friedrich and the play is Longings. A country road suggest a Hope of someone coming. A Tree suggest liveliness or Birth. Evening suggest Death and despair of desire. Loss of something. So thus the painting and play swinging  in between hope and despair

(2) The tree is the only important ‘thing’ in the setting. What is the importance of tree in both acts? Why does Beckett grow a few leaves in Act II on the barren tree - The tree has four or five leaves - ? 
Yes, The tree is the only important thing in the setting. Tree suggest the presence of nature in the ruined setting. In act l  Hopelessness presented through it because tree without leaf is like life without breathe. But, in act II there is few leaves grows on barren tree it shows the hope of rebirth. We can not exactly clarify reason that why Becket grow a few leaves  on the barren tree, but May be he wants to show the hope. ‘Constant Waiting and yet nothing happens’ this condition of characters can lead them to disheartenment but their spiritual or inner grow is shown through leaves on barren tree.


(3) In both Acts, evening falls into night and moon rises. How would you like to interpret this ‘coming of night and moon’ when actually they are waiting for Godot? The director feels the setting with some debris. Can you read any meaning in the contours of debris in the setting of the play?
It is open to interpret that How we see the setting. We often quotes that ‘When it rains we look for rainbow and when it’s dark we look for stars’ It means we always in search of better. This monotony of living, breathing like Sisyphus. We take the Sun on shoulder at morning and at night put it there. This vicious circle of life goes on.  As evening falls into night and moon rises is suggest that another day will come, tomorrow never dies and something must happen.

And as I write above the Debris is the symbol of effect of world war. That fallen structures may be skyscrapers in past but today it is no more than debris. This idea connect the philosophy of life that… one day everything will destroy, we will melt with Mitti and nothing remains after death.

4) The play begins with the dialogue “Nothing to be done”. How does the theme of ‘nothingness’ recurs in the play?
Play does not have hallucinatory images of life. It begins with the dialogue “Nothing to be done”, and so many times it repeats. Dialogue like..
“let us contradict each other
This is gamic of each other
Quest of question 
Stop talk about nature”
This all conversation, exercise, variety of killing time is presented but nothing happens till end. This way nothingness recurs in the play.

5) Do you agree: “The play (Waiting for Godot), we agreed, was a positive play, not negative, not pessimistic. As I saw it, with my blood and skin and eyes, the philosophy is: 'No matter what— atom bombs, hydrogen bombs, anything—life goes on. You can kill yourself, but you can't kill life." (E.G. Marshal who played Vladimir in original Broadway production 1950s)?
Yes, I completely agree with this Idea.

6) How are the props like hat and boots used in the play? What is the symbolical significance of these props?
As per my thinking Hat is symbol of head from which thought is comings and boot is symbol if leg which shows strength of standing. Here in the play Vladimir’s action suggest it that how he paining from thinking and Estragon is free from this. Vladimir's action shows his agony in inner struggle.

VLADIMIR:
Sometimes I feel it coming all the same. Then I go all queer. (He takes
of his hat, peers inside it, feels about inside it, shakes it, puts it on again.) How shall I say? Relieved and at the same time. (he searches for the word) . . . appalled. (With emphasis.)
AP-PALLED. (He takes of his hat again, peers inside it.) Funny. (He knocks on the crown as though to dislodge a foreign body, peers into it again, puts it onagain.) Nothing to be done. (Estragon with a supreme ef ort succeeds in
pulling of his boot. He peers inside it, feels about inside it, turns it upside down, shakes it, looks on the ground to see if anything has fallen out, finds nothing, feels inside it again,
staring sightlessly before him.) Well? 
(Boots = earth, body, roots. Hat = mind, rational side of life. Meaninglessness of both to reach to) 

7)Do you think that the obedience of Lucky is extremely irritating and nauseatic? Even when the master Pozzo is blind, he obediently hands the whip in his hand. Do you think that such a capacity of slavishness is unbelievable?
Yes, I think that the obedience of Lucky is extremely irritating and nauseatic. There is many examples in literature like in Gujrati there is one couplet that આંધળો સસરોને સરંગટ વહુ એમ કથા સાંભળવા ચાલયા સહુ, Lucky’s condition is like same. In a way many religious institution is stand for Pozzo and so called Bhaktas are lucky. 

(8) Who according to you is Godot? God? An object of desire? Death? Goal? Success? Or  . . .
“The subject of the play is not Godot but ‘Waiting’” (Esslin, A Search for the Self). Do you agree? How can you justify your answer?
According to me Desire of object is Godot. Without desire no existence of Human. We keep on Waiting for fulfillment of our desire. We leaping one to another situation and trying to find fruit of our karma. And between that necessity and absurdity keeps on changing. Vicious circle of life moves on and in darkness we wait for light and in light we wait for spark. Thus, The subject of play is not Godot but Waiting.

(9) Do you think that plays like this can better be ‘read’ than ‘viewed’ as it requires a lot of thinking on the part of readers, while viewing, the torrent of dialogues does not give ample time and space to ‘think’? Or is it that the audio-visuals help in better understanding of the play?
Yes I think the play like this can be better understandable if it will be read first than viewed. Reading of the play helps to understand the things in the better way. If we first view play without reading we can see only which director can see. We can’t escape from directors vision but while reading we are free to imagine in our way. 

Secondly, I didn’t think that only audio visuals help in better understanding of the play because dialogue keeps going on with it rhythm and sometime swiftly and goes with that it is not an easy in understanding, we miss many in hurry and minor thinking can not be done.

(10) Which of the following sequence you liked the most:
Vladimir – Estragon killing time in questions and conversations whilewaiting
Pozzo – Lucky episode in both acts
Converstion of Vladimir with the boy
I liked sequence between Vladimir and Estragon. Their unnecessary talks also means some sense. As necessity and absurdity keeps on changing in our life their talks some time like absurd and some time with deep meaning. e.g.,

VLADIMIR:
You should have been a poet.
ESTRAGON:
I was. (Gesture towards his rags.) Isn't that obvious?
Silence.
VLADIMIR:
Where was I . . . How's your foot?
ESTRAGON:
Swelling visibly.
VLADIMIR:
Ah yes, the two thieves. Do you remember the story?
ESTRAGON:
No.
VLADIMIR:
Shall I tell it to you?
ESTRAGON:
No.
Here, we can see Portrait of poet and biblical refrence of thieves

(11) Did you feel the effect of existential crisis or meaninglessness of human existence in the irrational and indifference Universe during screening of the movie? Where and when exactly that feeling was felt, if ever it was?
Yes, I feel the effect of existential crisis or meaninglessness of human existence in the irrational and indifference Universe. While watching the movie so many conversation of Estragon and Vladimir makes me feel this. Like, 'Nobody comes, Nobody goes, It's awful.' in other words, 'Somebody comes, somebody goes, yet nothing happen.' That kind of dialogue sowing seed of existentialism in my mind and push me in deep thinking and connecting with myth of Sisyphus.

(12) Vladimir and Estragon talks about ‘hanging’ themselves and commit suicide, but they do not do so. How do you read this idea of suicide inExistentialism?
When there is interrogation that, 'will night never come? And May be day will end.' It is symbolic representation of death. Night coming with death coming. When Vladimir and Estragon talks about Hanging and commit suicide, It shows they feel tired in waiting. When we constantly waiting for something and agonizing for result, yet didn’t get it, the worst feeling of disheartened force to think of suicide. But as Tomorrow never comes same as Tomorrow never dies, sowing the seed of hope in mind and they do not do suicide.


End of film Aankho dekhi also shows the suicide of Central character. Suicide with understanding! Though it is connecting idea of existetialism here. According to Existentialism suicide is not the solution. Existentialism says that even if there is no meaning in life but it doesn’t mean that one should end their life. That is why Vladimir and Estragon thinks to do so but they do not so. 

(13) 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'?

Vladimir – Russia
Estragon -France
Pozzo - Italy 
Lucky – England
 This interpretation be inferred from the play written just after World War II. All these countries were lost in their gimmicks and passing time in wait for something good to come out. What actually turned out to be the end of Waiting, in form of Godot was Second World War – the rise of Hitler. Thus, Germany is stands for Godot as per this view. 

(14) So far as Pozzo and Lucky [master and slave] are concerned, we have to remember that Beckett was a disciple of Joyce and that Joyce hated England. Beckett meant Pozzo to be England, and Lucky to be Ireland." (Bert Lahr who played Estragon in Broadway production). Does this reading make any sense? Why? How? What?
Pozzo and Lucky both are kept in master slave relationship. This can completely understand by viewing or reading after play. And we see that after the blindness of his master ( Pozzo) Lucky can't be free because he doesn't want. So, Ireland always be slave of England and we read this with colonial perspective because, Ireland is small country and for its own purpose of buisness and goods it sticks with England.

(15) The more the things change, the more it remains similar. There seems to have no change in Act I and Act II of the play. Even the conversation between Vladimir and the Boy sounds almost similar. But there is one major change. In Act I, in reply to Boy;s question, Vladimir says: 
"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? Is there any change in seeming similar situation and conversation? If so, what is it? What does it signify?

"BOY: What am I to tell Mr. Godot, Sir?
VLADIMIR: Tell him . . . (he hesitates) . . . tell him you saw me and that . . . (he hesitates) . . . that you saw me. (Pause. Vladimir advances, the Boy recoils. Vladimir halts, the Boy halts. With sudden violence.) You're sure you saw me, you won't come and tell me tomorrow that you never saw me!”

This How act two is ending. What the change in both the end is in Vladimir’s mentality. ‘You did see us”  convert into “you saw me” . Vladimir concern for his  Conscience only. We can connect it with 'Two thieves story' (biblical refrence and refrence of Gospel writer, disciple of jesus) which was told earlier that one was saved and one was damned. Here he also want to be the one who was saved. He emphasize on remembering only him.