‘Waiting for Godot’ by Samuel Beckett emphasises on Vladimir and Estragon’s “wait” for Godot, a character that the audience is well-aware will never come. The play uses the theme of waiting along with existential philosophies to challenge the notions of time and reality. Unlike most plays, in ‘Waiting for Godot’, the protagonist’s identities are not rigid and a lot about the characters and their presence in the play is left ambiguous. With the help of this, Beckett is able to build a play around the act of waiting itself, forcing the actors as well as the audience to be aware of the theatrical farce as well as question this act that exists in their own daily lives.
Beckett’s Beliefs
The play was written after the Second World War, between 1945-1950, after Beckett was caught for fighting against Nazism and fled to France. For this reason, it was originally written in French, a language that Beckett claimed allowed him to write without any stylistic devices. France also brought an influence of several French philosophers like Jean-Paul Sartre and Albert Camus whose thoughts about existence and reality contributed to the formulation of the play. The existential philosophies of these thinkers also led Beckett to experiment with many aspects of conventional theatre. G.J.V Prasad states that Beckett interpreted the existential philosophy to conclude that “any location outside ourselves is only distracting scenery” which led him to write plays devoid of points of action or rigid characterization.
This lack of plot and firm belief in introspection also makes Beckett’s play unconventional in its approach to theatre. Without any grandeur, the play focuses on four, main characters and the setting is established only with the help of “a tree”. These act as features for Beckett, helping the play bring focus to the façade of theatre that is being presented and allow the actors as well as the audience to question their presence in the theatre.
Allowing interpretations
The ambiguity in the play may also be a reflection of Beckett’s inability to preach to others. His belief was fairly grounded in his interpretation of existentialism which can also been seen in his personal life. In 1932, years before writing ‘Waiting for Godot’, Beckett had quit his job as Assistant Lecturer because, he stated, “I could not bear the absurdity of teaching others what I did not know myself”. Similarly, in his theatre, Beckett did not present any interpretation or meaning to his text, allowing the reader/audience to assemble their own notions of the play. To him, the true essence of human existence and our presence on the Earth was unknown and he was unable to convey to another person something that he himself could not be sure of.
For this reason, even now, more than fifty years after the play was first performed, it has been interpreted by many in different scenarios. David Smith explains that “Waiting for Godot seems to have a unique resonance during times of social and political crisis”. Smith stated that Beckett “refused to elucidate” the “mysteries” of Godot, due to which Godot is able to take any shape or form. He further explains this by stating:
Who, or what is Godot? Whatever you want it to be
and captures Beckett’s own desire to leave room for introspection, fantasy and imagination rather than using naturalism and forcing the playwright’s message onto the audience.
In 1993, the play was adapted in Sarajevo after the siege that took place in the capital. The identities of the protagonists were changed, creating couples with people of different genders, and the play was performed by candlelight due to the lack of electricity. The play also brought people from large distances to travel on foot to the theatre with a lack of public transport or food for actors. For people in Sarajevo, theatre and Beckett’s writing captured a universal plight and suffering that allowed the people to bond. The play was also referred to as “Waiting for Clinton”, where Godot’s ambiguous identity finds meaning in its new setting.
Conclusion
‘Waiting for Godot’ is a mediation on the nature of waiting and existence as it focuses sorely on those two themes, without the distractions of character identities, stage setting or any theatrical façade. The play has been able to adapt with time and space, allowing Beckett’s writing to hold relevance even today as we wait for our lives to resume after this pandemic.
