This blog is reaponse of Thinking Activity given by Professor Dr.Dilip Barad sir. Here I discuss about some questions regarding this film screening.
About the Flim:
Only one attempt to capture "Waiting for Godot" on film deserves mention. In 2001, an Irish TV movie came out as part of a project titled "Beckett on Film." Director Michael Lindsay-Hogg managed to prove that the play is indeed flammable. The key to his success at doing so was by focusing on directing the actors, marinating the one simple set, and using minimal cinematography. With "Waiting for Godot," it's a case of less is more. Still, watching it on stage is preferred, as Lindsay-Hogg does tend to overuse close-ups.In this version (above), Barry McGovern plays Vladimir and Johnny Murphy is Estragon.
About the play:
Waiting for Godot is a modern play written by Samuel Beckett. It was written or we can call it was first performed on 5th January, 1953. This play has modern art in it as per critics. It is one of the most discussed and debated plays by critics and scholars. The story is very simple- Vladimir and Estragon- two tramps are waiting for someone called Godot, but Godot never comes. Who or What is Godot? Why is he not coming? Why are both tramps waiting for Godot? What will happen if Godot comes?? Since how long Estragon and Vladimir are waiting? These and many other similar kinds of questions remain unanswered.
Samuel Beckett's language is very simple, but that simplicity is deceiving.
Waiting for Godot falls under the category of Theatre of Absurd. It has no plot, neither beginning nor end. it ends at a similar mode from where it begins. Existentialism is a prominent theme of this play.Beckett‟s time in France also coincided with an active period in Existential philosophy, most of it centered in Paris. Existentialism is a philosophy focused on existence and how a person exists in the world. The philosophy holds that people do not have an inherent nature or essence, but instead define their "self" through their actions and choices. While Beckett is not an Existentialist, a generally existential view of the human condition comes through very clearly in the play.
Why should you read "Waiting For Godot"?
Two men, Estragon and Vladimir, meet by a tree at dusk to wait for someone named “Godot.” So begins a vexing cycle where the two debate when Godot will come, why they’re waiting and whether they’re even at the right tree. The play offers a simple but stirring question- what should the characters do?
1, 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?
Ans, In the play Waiting for Godot there is two act play. Both play ending with same time like.
1, Evening time to fall of night.
2, Evening time to rise to moon.
We can say that, ‘Nothing to be done’ is central idea of the play. This is exactly the central idea of the play.
" Nothing happens , nobody comes , nobody goes, it's awful."
Evening turns into night. Light always not gives the positive attitude in life. Somehow night is connected to Death. And Valdimir said that ' Will Night never comes?' it's also connected to the fall of night and rise of the moon.This way i interpret this coming of night and moon.
2, director feels the setting with some debris. Can you read any meaning in the contours of debris in the setting of the play?
Ans, Waiting for Godot' is an Absurd play which highlights the absurdities of life. The play is written around Second world war so we can see the effect of world war ll. Many buildings were demolished during the war and all spaces were covered with rubbish. This Idea director use as a setting of the film. And also we can connect with this second world war with today's Russia and Ukraine war.
3, 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)?
Ans, Yes I agree with this statement , the play is positive and pessimistic play. this play give us a very true picture of life ,through the character of Estragon and Vladimir , they were waiting for Godot , but he never came, in the process of waiting they used to kill their time by doing certain activities but after that when the Godot didn't come they got depressed and even thought to commit suicide. Then both of them started waiting for Godot again. We can connect ourselves with these characters. In our lives we are all waiting to achieve something and for that we are waiting for it. But that doesn't happen.Waiting is the prime activity of human beings and while waiting like Estragon and Vladimir we are also stringed with some achievements and goals and desire to come true. So, Waiting is at the center of the play which suggests a kind of positive attitude towards life.
4, Do you think that the obedience of Lucky is extremely irritating and nauseated? Even when the master Pozzo is blind, he obediently hands the whip in his hand. Do you think that such a capacity for slavishness is unbelievable?
Ans, Yes, I think the obedience of Lucky is extremely irritating and nauseatic. When his master becomes blind he has the chance to run away but he didn't do that. We are tied up with some kind of rope from which we don't want to free. This is a capacity for slavishness is unbelievable.
We never allow ourselves to come out from the bond of relations, whether it is with relatives or whether it is with God. We know that we are not tied by anyone but still we can't escape or can't think of living our ideas, beliefs, or we can say superstitions also. Lucky also does this same thing in the play, even when Pozzo becomes blind, he never feels to make himself free from the chains and give it to the hand of his master Pozzo.
5, 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?
Ans, yes I think that, play is better understand to read rather than watching. Reading of the play helps to understand the things in the better way. If we first see the play without reading you can't understand it properly. If we viewed film first then we can’t not understand the main themes it also requires reading & thinking. In this play we find out so many fast dialogues. If we have seen the film before we do not understand the dialogue but then when we read the drama we can understand the drama so we can say that reading is more comprehensible rather than watching the film.
6) Which of the following sequence you liked the most:
1) Vladimir – Estragon killing time in questions and conversations while waiting
2)Pozzo – Lucky episode in both acts
3) Converstion of Vladimir with the boy
Ans, I like the conversational scene between Vladimir and Estragon.Vladimir and Easragon killing their time at that time both arguing with each other and both tells deep philosophy of life in their conversations. For example –
VLADIMIR:
(stooping). True. (He buttons his fly.) Never neglect the little things of
life.
ESTRAGON:
What do you expect, you always wait till the last moment.
VLADIMIR:
(musingly). The last moment . . . (He meditates.)
the something sick, who said that?
Thank you
Words: 1,359
No comments:
Post a Comment