Search This Blog

Monday, May 9, 2022

p - 107 Assignment

P - 107 Assignment

Topic: Waiting for Godot As An Absurd play

Name: Nidhi Dave

Paper- The Twentieth-century Literature: From world war ll to the End of the country.

Roll no- 16

Enrollment no- 4069206420210005

Email ID - davenidhi05@gmail.com 

Batch-2021-23(MA Sem-2)

Submitted to- S. B. Gardi Department of English. Maharaja Krishnakumarsinhji Bhavnagar University. 

Waiting for Godot As An Absurd play
   

Introduction:

Waiting for Godot” is clearly influenced by the typical qualities of the modern French drama. The playwright tries to communicate like the French dramatist the meaninglessness of life through dialogues. It is like the naturalist drama of Ibsen and G. B. Shaw in its emphasis on discussion. Nothing significant happens on the stage. The theater of absurd prefers existential things, and, therefore, occasionally it woos Nihilism. The characters are insubstantial but become significant for the symbols they represent. After the first performance of ‘Waiting for Godot‘ (5th January 1953) critics were convinced that Beckett had contrived an absolute negation of human existence. It took more time than other plays to draw their attention from the surface of these stagnant waters to the life of their microorganism

Martin Esslin wrote a book titled “Theater of the Absurd” that was published in 1961. It dealt with the dramatists who belonged to a movement called “Absurd Theater” though it was not regular. Samuel Beckett was one of those dramatists who had largest contribution in “Absurd Theater”. His play “Waiting for Godot” also belonged to the same category and was called an absurd play. 

Waiting for Godot as an Absurd play



What Ionesco insists upon in the nothingness and absurdity of life, so does Samuel Becket: “Nothing happens, nobody comes, nobody goes, it’s awful.” Absurd drama is a complete denial of age old values. It has no plot, no characterization, no logical sequence, no culmination. It questions the very meaning of existence, which is full of sound fury but signifies nothing. The term “absurd” was first used by Albert Camus in his famous work, The Myth of Sisyphus (1942). It is very clear from the very word “Absurd” that it means nonsensical, opposed to reason, something silly, foolish, senseless, ridiculous and topsy-turvy. So, a drama having a cock and bull story would be called an absurd play.

The theater of the absurd is a phenomenon of the fifties. Becket’s Waiting for Godot reflects the absurdist position of the Post World War II human who is lost in the labyrinth of disillusionment. The glorification of life has been slept into history; humanity lost its way.

‘Nothingness’ (ex nihilo nihil fit) constitutes the major concern for Samuel Becket. According to Martin Esslin, “Nothingness is related to an empty space – no spur to look forward.''The play Waiting for Godot is only active in gestural energy: “Lets go”. Martin Esslin in his book The Theatre of the Absurd(1961) claims that, Waiting for Godot does not tell a story. It explores a static situation: “Everything is dead but the tree.” The play is based on the theme “nothing to be done”. The gestural energy of the tramps waiting for the sake of waiting ends in “They do not move.”

There was no regular movement regarding theater of absurd rather it was a group of people who wrote plays without following the conventional rules. In simple words, performance of plays that were written by group of unconventional writers was called theater of absurd. 

No clear definition of theater of absurd is available. However, Martin Esslin provided an informal definition of absurd plays and “absurd theater” in following words:

“If a good play must have a cleverly constructed story, these [plays of absurd] have no story or plot to speak of; a good play is judged by subtlety of characterization and motivation, these are often without recognizable characters and present the audience with almost mechanical puppets; a good play has to have a fully explained theme, which is neatly exposed and finally solved, these often have neither a beginning nor an end; if a good play is to hold the mirror up to nature and portray the manners and mannerisms of the age in finely observed sketches, these seem often to be reflections of dreams and nightmares; if a good play relies on witty repartee and pointed dialogue, these often consist of incoherent babblings.”

- Martin Esslin on absurd plays 

Characteristics of Absurd Theater:

From the above said remarks it is crystal clear that absurd plays were entirely different from traditional plays. These remarks provide us following characteristics of absurd theater:

  • No story or plot
  • Lack of characterization
  • Neither a proper beginning nor ending
  • Unexplained themes
  • Imitation of dreams or nightmares instead of nature
  • Useless dialogues

“Waiting for Godot” as an Absurd Play:

“Waiting for Godot” fulfills every requirement of an absurd play. It has no story, no characterization, no beginning nor any end, unexplained themes, imitation of dreams and nightmares and above all it contains useless dialogues.

No story or plot:

“Waiting for Godot” does not tell any story nor does it have a plot. The play starts with waiting and ends with it. Characters do not go anywhere. They stand still in front of the audience and do nothing except pass the ball. They talk and pass the time. The play lacks action. Actions of the characters are not related to the plot but to themselves. Vladimir and Estragon wait for Godot and the audience perceive that perhaps the real story of the play will start after Godot’s arrival but Godot does not appear on stage nor is he introduced to the audience. Eventually, play ends with waiting. In this way, “Waiting for Godot” fulfills the first requirement of an absurd play.

Lack of Characterization :

The lack of characterization is the hallmark of any absurd drama. In Waiting for Godot, Estragon, Vladimir, Lucky, Pozzo and the non-existence Godot do not Grow during the course of the play. They cannot be treated as proper character. Their cross-talks reflect the very idea of nothingness as they have nothing to communicate – just to be in a static position perpetually. “Here form is content and content is form.” At the end of the play we are at the same position as we were at the beginning. The trajectory of nothingness develops in between.

We don’t know the past of the characters. They are not introduced to the audience. We know only their names and their miserable situation. Their motifs are unclear. Although it is explicit that they are waiting for Godot yet it is not told to the audience what purpose Godot will serve if he comes. Hence, lack of characterization proves that “Waiting of Godot” is a play of absurd theater. 

No Beginning and End

It has no beginning nor has any end. It starts with a situation and ends with it. Both the acts start and end in the same way. For instance, when characters come on stage they reveal their purpose. They say they are waiting but Godot does not come and the act ends with waiting. Second act is also a copy of the first act with minor differences. The play goes on and eventually ends with a wait. Hence, there is no proper start of the play nor does it have a proper end. It is a journey from nothingness to nothingness as observed by eminent critics.

It is a play in which nothing happens twice…. “Nothing happens, nobody comes … nobody goes, it’s awful!”.

Fulfillment of this requirement also proves that “Waiting for Godot” is an absurd play.

Useless Dialogues:

Most of the dialogues of this play serve no purpose. Incoherent babbling is also an important ingredient of the theater of absurdity as mentioned by Esslin. Whole play is based on delivery of dialogues but most of them have no apparent meanings. Every dialogue is full of symbols. Every word refers to something in hidden meaning but it lacks the interest of the audience because it lacks action.

Dialogues create action in every play. Action loses its importance without worthy dialogues. In the case of “Waiting for Godot '', no action has been presented, therefore, dialogues are boring and they are written just to pass the ball. Thus, they are meant to pass the time. Word “nothing” has been repeated numerous times in the play. It actually indicates nothingness in it. Thus, dialogues of the play are nothing but incoherent babbling. “Waiting for Godot” can be called an absurd play due to this trait of absurd theater. 

Unexplained Themes:

Unclear themes also make “Waiting for Godot” a play of absurd theater. Audience do not observe any obvious theme in the play. Superiority of a play is always dependent on its themes. “Waiting for Godot” has no obvious theme. If there is any, it is hidden. Moreover, it presents an individualistic vision of the writer. There is an effect of alienation in the play with respect to themes.

Imitation of Nightmares:

This play does not hold the mirror up to nature. It does not portray the manners and mannerisms of the ages. Esslin is true in his definition of absurd theater. This play “seem[s] often to be a reflection of dreams and nightmares”.

At last but not the least, “Waiting for Godot” is an entirely unconventional play. Samuel Becket violated all dramatic conventions. Indeed, every ingredient of the theater of absurdity has been fulfilled by him. Regardless of that, this play is successful. He wrote this play to break the rules of traditional dramatists. “Waiting for Godot” completes every factor of theater of absurdity, therefore, it can successfully be called the play of absurdity. 

In an absurd drama, speech is reduced to a minimum, In the theater of the absurd, rules are broken, conventions are flouted. As Esslin states, “If a good play relies on witty repartee and pointed dialogue, these often consist of incoherent babblings”. Here the language is used just as a mere game to pass time – as they have nothing to do. Most of the time, the appropriate discourse is being broken. The logicism of conversation has not been maintained.

 

Estragon: Well, shall we go?

Vladimir: Yes, let’s go.

(The do not move)

 Conclusion:

We may conclude in the voice of Esslin,

“It is the peculiar richness of a play like Waiting for Godot that it opens vistas on so many different perspectives. It is open to philosophical, religious and psychological interpretations, yet above all it is a poem on time, evanescence, the paradox of change and stability, necessity and absurdity”.


Words: 1,695

Reference:

https://www.eng-literature.com/2017/10/samuel-beckets-waiting-for-godot-as-an-absurd-drama-title.html

https://www.literaturewise.in/mdl/mod/page/view.php?id=7#:~:text=Waiting%20for%20Godot%E2%80%9D%20is%20an,devoid%20of%20characterization%20and%20motivation.

https://askliterature.com/drama/samuel-beckett/waiting-for-godot/waiting-for-godot-as-an-absurd-play/

No comments:

Post a Comment

Assignment

Assignment writing: Paper 210A Research Project Writing: Dissertation Writing   Dissertation Topic: "Reading 'New India' in F...