Samuel Beckett

Beckett was a major fgure in modern European drama, the man who made everyone
reconsider the nature of contemporary theatre with a single play about two tramps waiting for
somebody they do not know in the middle of nowhere.
The man and the playwright
Samuel Beckett is, like many of the major fgures in the history of English drama, an Irishman
and, like many Irishmen and many Irish writers, an epatriate. Born in !"#$ in a %ublin
suburb, into a &rotestant middle'class family. (e was educated at )rinity *ollege, %ublin. +fter
taking his degree in modern languages, he moved to &aris where he became a lecturer in
English for , years and he was in-uenced by eistentialism. (e settled permanently in &aris in
!"./ and wrote most of his works frst in 0rench, then translated them into English.
+fter a brief return to )rinity *ollege in !".#, Beckett began to travel across Europe, especially
in 0rance and 1ermany and during the ,
nd
2orld 2ar, he joined the 0rench 3esistance against
1ermans and he had to go away, being annotated by the 1estapo. +fter his liberation, Beckett
returned to &aris in !"45 and here he began his literary career as a short'story writer and a
novelist, even if his international reputation was established by his plays. %uring the following
fve years he wrote, in 0rench, Waiting for Godot; Endgame: a trilogy in prose which shows the
dissolution of the relationship between the physical and the intellectual sides man
eperiences at the moment of his death6 and some short stories. 7ost of these works he
subse8uently translated into English, but the impact of Godot and his other plays was such
that Beckett was awarded the 9obel &ri:e for literature in !"$". (e died in !";".
(is later plays< Krapp's Last Tape =!"5;> is a monologue which epresses the impossibility for
a man to fnd an identity6 Happy Days =!"$!> reveals the playwright?s tendency to reduce
characters to motionless individuals6 Come and Go =!"$$>6 Not I =!"/.> and others show an
austere form of drama. )hey seem to deny the notion of characters in interaction which had
traditionally been the defning characteristic of drama. )hey present a single character who
hardly moves and speaks less and less. 2ords there are separated by long pauses and
occasional interruptions from a recorded or disembodied voice. In the !"$#s and /#s Beckett
showed an interest in broadcasting and produced several short radio plays for the BB*.
The Theatre of the Absurd
Beckett was one of the dramatists who developed the so'called Theatre of the As!rd with the
common basic belief that man?s life appears to be meaningless and purposeless and that
human beings cannot communicate and understand each other. Since the @5#s many
dramatists developed the Theatre of the As!rd, the result of multiple in-uences like<
A ancient mime and the famous fgures of silent flms6
A ShakespeareBs fools and clowns6
A 0rench writer +lfred Carry?s, whose obscene language and senseless plot challenged the
traditional theatre.
)he Theatre of the As!rd is concerned with the metaphysical 8uestion of the purpose of
human eistence. )he concept of absurdity derives from the eistentialist works of +lbert
*amus and Cean'&aul Sartre. In their work, eistentialist man is a lonely creature confronted
by a vast emptiness in which his acts seem insignifcant. )he characters in the drama of the
absurd are both hopeless and strangely heroic in their desperate attempt to confrm their
human identity. )he basic themes of the Theatre of the As!rd are<
A the sense of man?s alienation6
A the cruelty of eistence6
A the futility of conventional objectives6
A the futility of man?s struggle.
)he dramatists of the absurd are continually involved in eperimentation. *haracters, script,
action, and scenery are often reduced to minimum and the drama itself, as in Samuel
Beckett?s works, is reduced to parable. )he language is simple and plain. )o achieve this
purpose Beckett wrote his works in his second language, 0rench. Det, the )heatre of the
+bsurd can create comedy through its use of language< jokes, puns, twisted clichEs and
hilarious comments. *haracters are often reductive allegorical fgures of mankind< tramps,
outcasts, poverty'stricken old men. )hey wear rags, they are diseased, they smell. )he action
of these plays is generally circular, often repeating similar or identical situations from act to
act.
Waiting for Godot: the plot
Waiting for Godot is a metaphor of human eistence dealing with the problem of how to get
through life6 the answer is simple and sad< by force of habit, by going on in spite of boredom,
pain and hopelessness. )he play is divided into two acts. In +ct I two tramps, Fladimir and
Estragon, or %idi and 1ogo, are waiting on a country road for a mysterious 1odot, who
eventually sends a boy to inform them he will surely come on the following day. )he tramps
are continually aware of cold, hunger and pain6 they 8uarrel and think about separation and
even suicide in each act, yet remain dependent on each other and never do anything. +s
opposed to the two protagonists, the other characters in the play, &o::o and Gucky, who are
physically linked to each other by a rape as well as by a tyrannical relationship of master and
servant, make continuous purposeless journeys to fll their eistence. +ct II diHers only
apparently from the frst, and the play ends with the two tramps still waiting for 1odot who
never comes.
Absence of a traditional structure
)he play has no development in time, since there seems to be no past or future, just a
repetitive present, and a dreary stability characterises the world portrayed. It has no setting
but a country road and a bare tree6 it has no plot, because events do not mean anything in
the course of time. It has no characters in the traditional sense, as a character presupposes
some personality. It has no action, since the static situation of waiting is described6 it has no
dialogue in the conventional sense, because the characters are unable to provide each other
with information either about their present situation, or about their recent eperience and
current events in the world outside.
The symmetric structure
)he two acts are symmetrically built. )he play unit eHect is, in fact, its symmetry< the stage
divided into , halves by the tree, the human races divided into ,, %idi and 1ogo, then into 4,
%idi, 1ogo and &o::oIGucky, then, with the boy?s arrival, into , again, the mankind and 1odot.
+lso the characters? actions are symmetrical< throughout the play Estragon tries to take oH
one of his boots, while Fladimir takes his hat and peers into it. Both tramps need to take oH
their hat to think, whereas Gucky and &o::o need to do the opposite.
Vladimir and Estragon
Fladimir and Estragon are never described as tramps< they are two human beings perpetually
concerned with 8uestions about the nature of the self, world and 1od. )hey are
complementary, since they are diHerent aspects of a single whole. Fladimir is more practical,
he never dreams and he keeps waiting6 Estragon is a dreamer, sceptical about 1odot and
always complaining about mysterious persons who beat him during the night. +s the passing
of time, Estragon struggles to fnd games to help them reach their goal. )hus they engage in
insulting one another, in asking each other 8uestions creating a grotes8ue, humorous
atmosphere. )he diHiculty for Beckett of keeping a dialogue running for so long is overcome
by making his characters forget everything. Estragon cannot remember anything about his
past6 Fladimir, although possessing a better memory, distrusts what he remembers. Estragon
needs his friend to tell him his history6 it is as if Fladimir establishes Estragon?s identity by
remembering for him. Estragon also serves as a reminder for Fladimir of the things they have
done together. )hus both men serve to remind the other man of his very eistence.
The meaninglessness of time
)ime is meaningless as a direct result of chance, which is a t the basis of human eistence.
)his is why there is a cyclic pattern to events in Waiting for Godot" Fladimir and Estragon
return to the same place each day to wait for 1odot and eperience the same general events
with variations each time. It is not known for how long in the past they have been doing this,
or for how long they will continue to do it< time essentially is a chaos. (uman life is treated
arbitrarily and is characterised by suHering, but Beckett does not want to oHer any solution
because when you try to systemise, you simplify and stop understanding the truth. )he
fundamental 8uestion is< JIs there a 1odKJ. )he evidence seems to be that there is no 1od but
Beckett leaves the 8uestion open because it is impossible to know.
The language
)he language of the play is informal, but it does not serve the purpose of communication<
dialogue is only sketched and each character, who usually follows his own thoughts, appears
to be perfectly aware that the words he produces are just a way to fll his endless waiting.
+nother device used to show the lack of communication of characters is the use of para'
verbal language, such as pauses, silences and gags.