Waiting For Godot Analysis

1289 Words3 Pages

Although Samuel Beckett's tragicomedy, Waiting for Godot, has no definite meaning or interpretation, the play acts as a statement of hopelessness regarding human existence. Debate surrounds the play because, due to its simplicity, almost any interpretation is valid. The main characters, Vladimir and Estragon, are aging men who must wait for a person, being, or object named Godot, but this entity never appears to grace the men with this presence. Both characters essentially demonstrate how one must go through life when hope is nonexistent as they pointlessly attempt to entertain themselves with glum conversation in front of a solitary tree. The Theater of the Absurd, a prevalent movement associated with Waiting for Godot, serves as the basis for the message of hopelessness in his main characters. Samuel Beckett's iconic Waiting for Godot and his perception of the characteristics and influence of the Theater of the Absurd illustrate the pointlessness and hopelessness regarding existence. In the play, boredom is mistaken for hopelessness because the men have nothing to do, as they attempt to occupy themselves as, for some reason, they need to wait for Godot. No hope is present throughout the two-act play with little for Estragon and Vladimir to occupy their time while they, as the title indicates, wait for Godot.
Hopelessness is evident in the most minute and absurd ways. In the beginning of the play, Estragon has difficulty in removing his boot, much to the dismay of the two men. The two men agree they are hopeless in this seemingly simple situation:
Estragon: Nothing to be done
Vladimir: I’m beginning to come round to that opinion (Beckett 1).
While the scene refers to the hopelessness in removing Estragon’s boot, the s...

... middle of paper ...

...these two men. They have no recollection of any events unless physical connections are present, causing them to enter a hopeless state concerning the existence of the strangers they meet. Pozzo, as well, suffers from amnesia from act to act. Since Estragon cannot remember anything, Vladimir needs to converse with Estragon in regards to what happened and his interpretation of these very events. It is as if Vladimir is establishing Estragon's identity by remembering for him. Estragon also serves as a reminder for Vladimir of all the memories they share; thus, both men serve to remind the other man of his very existence. This is necessary since no one else in the play ever remembers them. Dialogue is the only way for Vladimir and Estragon to have any way of recollecting events, thus placing them in a state of hopelessness where past events are a topic of struggle.

Open Document