Waiting for Godot Setting

  • Comment on ‘Waiting for Godot’ as a play in which nothing happens.

Waiting for Godot Setting is just very simple , that setting consist in a country road , a leaf less tree and nothing happens in both ‘ Acts’. just as the setting, the action and the dialogue  deliberately offer themselves know new directions for meanings, so the relationships within the play or sterile in terms of meaning. This conclusion is contrary to what we have come to expect in more traditional drama. There ,the relationships produce new direction for the plot. in ” Julius Caesar “,Brutus relationship with Cassius has a profound influence upon the lives of both Brutus and Cassius , or to take a modern example in “death of a salesman” beliefs relationship with his father willy Loman is shown as the cause both of Biffl’s intial failure in life and and of his hope for a better life letter. In “Waiting for Godot” the relationships do not produce any search result. Vladimir and Estragon might ,at the most ,be said to bring companionship to each other .Even their product of their relationship is to be doubted .For example in the second act Estragon tries to wring from Vladimir  the admission that he is happy to be reunited with his friend .Vladimir  is asked to make his declaration, “Even if it is true” and he finally says grudgingly and unconvincingly “I am happy”. Moreover towards the end of the play, Estragon even suggests that it might be better for them if they parted .These reaction are typical of their relationship. It is offers  no new suggestions or direction for either of them .they have nothing to  contribute ,one  to  the other .There only bond is there  fruitless waiting one may question the nature of their relationships to Godot. Godot never appears in the play there seem to be a similar lack  of for a new direction there. They are not sure who Godot is they do not know what he is really like that do not know why they are waiting for him and Godot never comes. Pozzo  and Lucky ,might at first ,seem to have a meaningful relationships. Lucky know his function ,he serves to Pozzo. Similarly  Pozzo knows his function he enslave lucky .their relationship is grotesque ,but it does not serve to  give some meaning to their existence. This  relationship might be said to be productive in that Limited way .However ,when Pozzo and lucky reappear in act 2 ,semblance  of meaning disappears , for the ,distinctiveness of their roles has vanished . But Pozzo and lucky and threshing helplessly on the ground and their depart stumbling hopelessly. Their relationship also is sterile.

The element of time in waiting for Godot reinforces the impression of  circularity suggested by the other elements which we have examined. Again notices the contrast with traditional drama in which time is an important element ,frequently used by the dramatist to in emphasis that tragic  progression of the heroes development from prosperity to ruin ,a to create an atmosphere of suspense. In which we watch with horror the in-exorable approach of tragic denouement. The later use of time element can seen most clearly  in Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet ,where the shortness of time contributes to the tragic ending in which two lovers commit suicide. In waiting for Godot the time  element  lacks both in quantity and quality. Time in this play can be said to lack quality because it lacks  significance for the characters. It is simply to be used up in waiting and the characters are happy when they can make time pass quickly .How the time flies when one has fun murmurs Vladimir  delightedly .And his remark is typical of the two friends who fuss over Estragon’s boots ,engage in calisthenics, quibble over food all in the interest of passing time. This there is no conception that  time can have different qualities. The theological  Paul Tillich’s distinction between chronous time and Kairos time measured by its duration, and time measured by sudden intrusion on the element of meaning would be incomprehensible  to Vladimir and Estragon they are caught  up in a process in which there seems to be no suggestion of new meaning are different quality. The confusion of the characters concerning the actual time seems to underline this very point. This is the reason for claiming ,of course, the time element in “Waiting for Godot’ even lacks true quantity .Thus ,at the beginning of the play, Estragon and   Vladimir are not  sure on which day they were supposed to meet Godot. They are not ever sure which day of the week the present one is .In the second act Estragon has to be convinced that he was at the same roadside yesterday. All that they are sure of  is that the hours are long under this conditions. In this situation Pozzo is of no help  he does not remember .Having met anyone today. In fact ,the remonstrates angrily  with Vladimir and Estragon owing one day is that not enough for you .

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

“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:-

“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….”

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 pettren.

For further detail visit Wikipedia link

Click here for more related questions

Leave a Reply

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