Waiting for Godot
Waiting for Godot (sometimes subtitled: a tragicomedy in 2 acts) is an absurdist play by Samuel Beckett, written in the late 1940s and first published in 1952. Beckett originally wrote Godot in French, his second language, as En attendant Godot (literally: While Waiting for Godot). An English translation by Beckett himself was published in 1955.
The play is in two acts, and in both of them the tramps Vladimir and Estragon wait in vain by a roadside for Godot, with whom they (perhaps) have an appointment. The audience never learns who Godot is or the nature of the business they expect to transact with him. In each act the cruel Pozzo and his slave Lucky turn up, followed by a boy who gives Vladimir and Estragon the message that Godot will not come today "but surely tomorrow". This intentionally uneventful and repetitious plot symbolizes the tedium and meaninglessness of human life which is a common theme of existentialism. A common interpretation of the mysteriously absent Godot is that he represents God, though Beckett always denied this. As a proper noun, the name "Godot" may derive from any number of French verbs. Beckett himself stated it was derivative of godillot, which is French slang for "boot". The title then might been seen as suggesting the characters of the play are "Waiting for the Boot".
Several unauthorized sequels where Godot actually arrives have been written by other authors, and at least one prequel.
Synopsis
The play is in two acts. The plot concerns Vladimir (also called Didi) and Estragon (also called Gogo), who arrive at a pre-specified roadside location in order to await the arrival of Godot. Vladimir and Estragon appear to be tramps: their clothes are ragged and do not fit, another theory is that Vladimir and Estragon could be refugees or soldiers displaced from a conflict, such as the Second World War, which had just occurred and provided Beckett with much inspiration for this play. They pass the time in conversation, and sometimes in conflict. Estragon complains of his ill-fitting boots, and Vladimir struts about stiff-legged due to a painful bladder condition. They make vague allusions to the nature of their circumstances and to the reasons for meeting Godot, but the audience never learns who Godot is or why he is important. They are soon interrupted by the arrival of Pozzo, a cruel but lyrically gifted man who claims to own the land they stand on, and his servant Lucky, whom he appears to control by means of a lengthy rope. Pozzo sits down to feast on chicken, and afterwards throws the bones to the two tramps. He entertains them by directing Lucky to perform a lively dance, and then deliver an ex tempore lecture on the theories of Bishop Berkeley. After Pozzo and Lucky depart, a boy arrives with a message supposedly from Godot, which states that Godot will not come today, but will come tomorrow evening. The boy also confesses that Godot beats his brother and that he and his brother sleep in the loft of a barn. The second act follows a similar pattern to the first, but when Pozzo and Lucky arrive, Pozzo has inexplicably gone blind and Lucky has gone mute. Again the boy arrives and announces that Godot will not appear. The much quoted ending of the play might be said to sum up the stasis of the whole work:
- Vladimir: Well, shall we go?
- Estragon: Yes, let's go.
- They do not move.
Stage history
The play was first performed in French at the Théâtre de Babylone, Paris in 1953, directed by French actor and comedian Roger Blin. The English-language premiere was in August 1955 at the Arts Theatre, London, directed by a 24 year old Peter Hall [1]. It transferred to the Criterion Theatre, in the London West End. At the time, theatre was strictly censored in England, to Beckett's amazement since he thought it a bastion of free speech. The Lord Chamberlain insisted that the word "erection" be removed. Indeed, there were attempts to ban the play completely. For example, Lady Dorothy Howitt wrote to the Lord Chamberlain, saying: "One of the many themes running through the play is the desire of two old tramps continually to relieve themselves. Such a dramatisation of lavatory necessities is offensive and against all sense of British decency."
Skilled comedians, like Robin Williams and Steve Martin in one US production (also Bert Lahr in the 1950s), have had the most success with the characters in popular esteem, and there is a heartfeltness about the dialogue and situation that is not always completely aligned with despair, along with dream-like, poetic passages; perhaps this is why the play is loved by its fans.
Beckett went on to resume his march towards the void in his new medium, and his later plays have had much less popular success, though they continue to be produced, and are generally accepted as important works.
One of the most interesting new interpretations of the play, was the performance directed by Alexander Arotin in 2005, with music of Olga Neuwirth and the installation of an animated space non-lieu by Alexander Arotin, multimedia by Mariapaz Montecinos
Interpretations
Beckett uses the characters' interaction to symbolise the tedium and meaninglessness of modern life, both major themes of the existentialists. Critic Vivian Mercier summed up the two-act play with the words "nothing happens, twice." Another critic, referring to the work's drawn-out scenes and scarcity of characters, summed up his review with a line from the play: "Nothing happens, nobody comes, nobody goes, it's awful!"
Despite its essential bleakness, however, it has many moments of comedy, some of it recalling the deadpan slapstick of Charlie Chaplin and Buster Keaton. Some of the business involving hats was adopted from a routine done by the Marx Brothers, and it may be noted that the character schema - four characters, one of whom is mute, and one of whom bears an Italian name - may have been derived from the same source. Critic Kenneth Burke argued that the interaction of Vladimir and Estragon is based on that of Laurel and Hardy. Near the end of the play, to give one example of the play's sillier moments, Estragon removes the cord holding his trousers up so he can hang himself with it, and his trousers fall down. In the original French production Beckett was adamant that the actor playing Estragon, who was reluctant to perform so foolish a piece of business, follow the directions to the letter Template:Fn.
Many readers of this play have understood the character "Godot" as a symbolic representation of God. They see Godot's persistent failure to appear and Vladimir and Estragon's aimless waiting as representations of the masses hoping for a being who will never appear. This is a common interpretation of the play, but one that Beckett himself vehemently denied all his life, saying "If by Godot I had meant God I would have said God, and not Godot"Template:Fn. Other interpretations hold Pozzo as the all encompassing "exploiter" or dictator, because of his tyrannical abuse of his servant and slave, Lucky, who won't even think without being told to (and when he does refuses to listen to Pozzo's orders for a time afterwards). His using of Vladimir's and Estragon's search for Godot to make them stay and talk with him is compared with opportunistic leaders use of their citizens' devotion to God to further their own means.
This was Beckett's third attempt at drama after an abortive attempt at a play about Samuel Johnson, and the considerably more conventional Eleutheria (which Beckett suppressed after writing Godot). Godot was the first to be performed. It was a big step back towards normal human experience after his novel The Unnamable. Subtitled "a tragicomedy," the script has little indication of setting or costume (but for Beckett's specific footnote that all four of the major characters wear bowler hats); the only indication for decor is the typically succinct "A country road. A tree. Evening" prior to Act I. As such, Godot is capable of sustaining a wide range of interpretation, including who, or what, Godot is.
The name "Godot" is pronounced in Britain and Ireland with the emphasis on the first syllable (i.e. "GOH-doh" or "GAW-doh"); in North America it is usually pronounced with an emphasis on the second syllable (i.e. "guh-DOH"). Beckett himself said the emphasis should be on the first syllable, and that the North American pronunciation is a mistake [2]. Etymologically the name is French, which (at least in the case of France) places equal emphasis on both syllables - "goh-doh".
Directly related works (other authors)
The title character of Balzac's 1851 play Mercadet is waiting for financial salvation from his never seen business partner, Godeau. Although Beckett was familiar with Balzac's prose, he only learned of this play after finishing Waiting for Godot. Coincidentally, Balzac's play was closely adapted to film as The Lovable Cheat (with Buster Keaton, whom Beckett greatly admired) at about the same time Beckett was writing his own play.
(Similarly, Beckett only learned of the champion Parisian cyclist Roger Godeau, whose fans reportedly "waited for Godeau", after finishing his play.)
Clifford Odets' famous 1935 play Waiting for Lefty was about workers oppressed by capitalism, waiting for the salvation in the form of union organizer Lefty. But the play ends as the workers learn that Lefty will not come after all (having been murdered).
An unauthorized prequel, of sorts, formed part II of Ian McDonald's novel King of Morning, Queen of Day (partly written in Joycean style). Two main characters are clearly meant to be the original Vladimir and Estragon.
An unauthorized sequel was written by Miodrag Bulatović in 1966: Godo je došao (Godot has come). It was translated from the Serbo-Croatian into German (Godot ist gekommen) and French. Although Beckett was noted for disallowing productions that took even slight liberties with his plays, he let this pass without incident.
Another unauthorized sequel was written by Daniel Curzon in the late 1990s: Godot Arrives.
A radical transformation was written by Bernard Pautrat, performed at Théâtre National de Strasbourg in 1979-1980: Ils allaient obscurs sous la nuit solitaire (d'après En attendant Godot de Samuel Beckett). The dialog consisted of excerpts from Godot, rearranged among ten actors (Vladimir, Estragon, Pozzo, Lucky and six others).
Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead, written by Tom Stoppard and first staged in 1966, contains a set of characters whose dialogue and themes are strongly influenced by the characters in Godot. Many claim that R & G overturns the dreary philosophical conclusions presented in Godot, while other critics disagree, claiming that R & G actually reinforces and strengthens those themes. Either way, R & G arguably continues the dialogue about existentialism and absurdism (though the latter is disputed by Stoppard) that Beckett started with Godot.
Alexei Sayle's TV sketch show Alexei Sayle's Stuff included a skit in which Godot desperately tries to hitch-hike to his waiting friends, but fails to get a lift. Eventually he finds his way to Estragon and Vladimir, but two other Godots arrive at the same time. Estragon says "Typical - you wait ages for Godot and then three show up at once".
External links
- Text of the play
- Wam, bam! Thank you Sam! A large resource on various interpretations of the play's aspects and its characters
- Godot Almighty An article in The Guardian looking back on fifty years of Waiting for Godot
- Waiting for Godot Online
- Samuel Beckett biography (in French)
Notes
Template:Fnb Discussed at length here: Gurnow, Micheal. No Symbol Where None Intended: A Study of Symbolism and Allusion in Samuel Beckett's Waiting for Godot. TheModernWorld.com
Template:Fnb Quoted from The Essential Samuel Beckett by Enoch Brater, p.75: ISBN 0-500-28411-3