“Waiting for Godot” Plot

  • Comment on “Waiting for Godot” as a play in which nothing happens.
    OR
  • Comment on play circular structure. or how would you interpret Waiting for Godot as a play. OR
  • How would you interpret “Waiting for Godot” as a play.

 
“Waiting for Godot” like other plays and novels of Beckett amply reflects Beckett’s vision of life. The vision needed a special structure and mood of expression to the reveal itself .Every constituent of the play contributes to that end. Characters , plot ,spectacle  and the  utterance of character  dialogue, all reflect Beckett’s  brand of existentialism ,absurdism comprehensively in”Waiting for Godot” . Estrgon’s awareness of his limitations reaveled in his statements, nothing we can do about it, and then another statement we always find something ,Eh Didi ,to give us the impression that we exist, are typical of the dialogue in  Waiting for Godot .

The utterances of the two characters would seem a hollow rattle if the readers don’t try to discussion method in them .Taken seriously the dialogues provide a key to the probable theme of the play are the interpretation of the play .We do notice to important aspect of this drama and they are in inability of the characters to undertake meaningful action and the difficulty of the characters in the believing that even their presence is meaningful .Looked at from these two angle ,the play would certainly seem to be different from traditional drama. Traditional plays have a rational  structure. Because the playwright has a certain view of the world to represent to us. He means to make us understand his meaning and admire the relevance of his ideas. To communicate this ideas he tries to erect a plot with a coherent pattern and the characters too are constructed logically to illustrate the ideas presented .Shakespearean plays proceeds systematically .We can always identify the acquisition ,the rising action ,the crisis t,he following action and the denouement. We are introduced to characters in the beginning of the play and also to their situation. In due course of time  ,they get  caught in complication that lead them to the crisis. Then things begin to unrevealing and head towards the denouement. The playwright shapes his action in such a way that it moves towards a probable conclusion. The characters and the action move coherently ,the emphasis being on making events following each other in a logical and probable manner. The end is determinated by action that has already taken place.” Waiting for Godot “on the contrary has a pattern that is mostly labelled by ocitics as circular. It being circular can be is ascertained  by examining the dialogues ,the setting ,time, relationships and action.

When the curtain rises we find that two tramps beside a country country road by a denuded tree. There are no landmarks tool and the specificity to the location .This is what the set consists of and this is where all the action takes place. It’s evening time and its evening again when the second act begins. There is no essential change difference .What we beheld in the first act and what we do in the second act .The two today’s seem no a different, not even time-wise. In other other word the second act is a reputation with slightly differences of the First Act .The playwright intentionally avoids introducing any new element in his plot construction in “Waiting for Godot” .The life of the tramps remain essentially what it was the day before ,without any remarkable change. Even the action exhibits a tendency towards reputation.Both the act  begin with the same situation .In act 1 Vladimir exclaims you again and a little later there you are again .The two tramps take about beating that Estragon has received in both acts. We find Estragon struggling with his boots and expressing his concern over his feet in both act .Again Vladimir has difficulties with urination in both act. There is a comic interplay of carrots , reddish and  turnips .In both acts the two tramps discuss the possibility of suicide by hanging. The boy as well as possible and lucky appear in the both act the concluding sentences at the end of the act both the acts are similar. At the end of the act one Vladimir  suggests “yes ,let’s go” and Estragon suggestion is similar at the end of the act 2,” yes let’s go”. And in the either cases we notice  neither of the two make any moments to really get up and leave. the similarity of pattern in between the act 2 is significant and makes the play different from traditional play with a linear structure .Repetitive actions draw our attention to the circular structure of” Waiting for Godot’ .

The dialogues too reveal the circulatory of pattern suggested earlier as wells plot construction in”Waiting for Godot” .Much of the dialogue feature inclusive repetitive conversation .The two tramps dispute a certain point most of their quarrels are over trivial matters and  reconcile. Vladimir asks what do we do now? and Estragon’s short answer is weight. In act 2 after a similar pause  Vladimir declares that they must wait for Godot .whenever the exhaust  their ideas and the struggle to act, they play plan to leave but and up only waiting for Godot. So , action end inactivity and meaningful topics degenerate into incoherence and silence. in most cases the utterances of the two tramps do not seem to be related to each other in a logical manners not do  they seem relevant .In  such situations  Vladimir impatiently shouts say something ,and Estragon responses which is suffered by a long silence is the futile  cry , “I am trying “.The conversation  reach no logical coherent conclusion. Perhaps , the best illustration  of the nature  dialogue in the play is provided by lucky. In First Act, lucky ,at the command of his master gives a long and a well known speech .It is form of a quasi the theological addresses which, at its core, has an apparently serious statement to make. Eliminating the nonsensical repetition and comic irrelevancies, Lucky becomes to make something like the following declaration:-

“Giving the existence…. of a personal God outside time…. who loves us clearly and suffers….. with those who…… are plunged in torment…..  it is establish beyond all doubt ….that man….”

http://yazdaliterature.com/m-a-english/who-is-godot/


But from the point of view of coherence and logic, the speech and at that point the conclusion is never given, the logical result of assumption  is never stated .The ultimate meaning is lost in a maze of irrelevance and incoherence. And so ,Lucky speech which begins with a solid-core of meaning and degenerates in to mere noises and finally silence, can be said to be typical of much of the dialogue in waiting for Godot. To development the action of the play in a linear direction would demand purposive dialogue ,capable of moving the action towards, new logical direction. In Beckett’s plays the circular pattern and produced no development and new directions.So , end of the conversation , we can say that in “Waiting for Godot” there is no traditional plot system, it is without plot pattern.

“Waiting for Godot” would seem insipid and meaningless to those who are not  accustomed to digging the below the surface of things .They may not find any logical or method in it because they expect a linear plot movement and methodical characters development .  The dialogue scene well motivated and the utterances and deeds of the characters  make sense in their respective situations. In other words the readers manage to rationalize  the onward plot movement and character development through experience. Now “Waiting for Godot” would  not lend itself to any facile intellectual interpretation .The job of the Reader or the spectator is fraught  with difficulties, particularly when he fails to apprehend the circularity of actions ,setting, dialogues, relationships and time .the circular movement of the plot in in particular is of special significance. It is the circular movement of the plot  that induces .The reader to ask what is it that the dramatist is trying to say to us .Like any good piece of literature.

The dialogues too reveal the circulatory of pattern suggested earlier as wells plot construction in”Waiting for Godot” .Much of the dialogue feature inclusive repetitive conversation .The two tramps dispute a certain point most of their quarrels are over trivial matters and  reconcile. Vladimir asks what do we do now? and Estragon’s short answer is weight. In act 2 after a similar pause  Vladimir declares that they must wait for Godot .whenever the exhaust  their ideas and the struggle to act, they play plan to leave but and up only waiting for Godot. So , action end inactivity and meaningful topics degenerate into incoherence and silence. in most cases the utterances of the two tramps do not seem to be related to each other in a logical manners not do  they seem relevant .In  such situations  Vladimir impatiently shouts say something ,and Estragon responses which is suffered by a long silence is the futile  cry , “I am trying “.The conversation  reach no logical coherent conclusion. Perhaps , the best illustration  of the nature  dialogue in the play is provided by lucky. In First Act, lucky ,at the command of his master gives a long and a well known speech .It is form of a quasi the theological addresses which, at its core, has an apparently serious statement to make. Eliminating the nonsensical repetition and comic irrelevancies, Lucky becomes to make something like the following declaration:-

CLICK HERE FOR RELATED QUESTIONS

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *