House of Notes

Q:      TO WHAT EXTANT VLADIMIR AND ESTRAGON ARE METAPHORS OF HUMANITY IN "WAITING FOR GODOT"? Q:       VLADIMIR     AND      ESTRAGON    ARE REPRESENTATION OF MAN IN GENERAL. ACCEPT OR REJECT THE STATEMENT. Q:      MAJOR CHARACTERS IN "WAITING FOR GODOT" ARE HUMAN BEINGS IN SEARCH FOR MEANINGS IN THE MEANINGLESS, HOSTILE UNIVERSE. Ans: Authors bring into play different modus operandi in their writings. Samuel Beckett makes use of allusions and references to characters to help the reader understand what the characters stand for. In his drama Waiting for Godot, Beckett's two main characters, Estragon and Vladimir, are symbolised as man. Separate they are two different sides of man, but together they represent man as a whole. In Waiting for Godot, Beckett uses Estragon and Vladimir to symbolize man's physical and mental state. Estragon represents the physical ...

Summary of  WAITING FOR GODOT- Samuel Becket Introduction: The  Theatre  of  Absurd  literally  means  “out  of  harmony”.  Ionesco,  who  is considered as one of the major dramatists  of the school of the absurd, defines, the ‘Absurd’ as that “which is devoid of purpose…. cut off from his religious, metaphysical, and transcendental roots, man is lost, all his actions become senseless, absurd, useless”. In Beckett’s words, human life is the endurance and tolerance to “the boredom of living” “replaced by the suffering of being”. Samuel Beckett’s first play, Waiting for Godot (1948) written originally in French is a play in two Acts, in which two characters wait for someone named Godot, who never arrives. It does not tell a story, and it does not have a plot. Instead, it explores a static situation  where  nothing  happens,  nobody  comes  and  nobody  goes.  It  represents...

Waiting for Godot A Brief Overview Samuel Beckett – Irish – b. 1906 Waiting for Godot – 1947 - 1949 Beckett was obsessed with man-as-machine and man-as-a-user-of-machines. (Descarts idea). If man is a machine created by a perfect Being, why is that machine so defective? If man can himself create machines, does he in some way resemble the Creator of man-as-machine? What are the responsibilities of a creator toward his defective creature, and vice versa, and of one creature toward another? (Frankenstein) Most of Beckett’s characters suffer either from failure to face themselves, or from the pain that results from only half-trying. In Waiting for Godot, Didi (Vladimir) hovers on the verge of selfdiscovery but he is too terrified and so lapses into unfulfillment. Kierkegaard – “Man is paralyzed by dread. Of what? Why? Because if he breaks out of his mindlimited, objectivist way of life, the possibilities are infinite, and nothing is certain. In all crises man must act decisively. The most ...

Q:       WAITING    FOR   GODOT IS A PLAY IN WHICH "NOTHING HAPPENS, TWICE." DISCUSS. Q:      COMMENT     ON     THE PAUCITY OF INCIDENT AND SITUATION IN "WAITING FOR GODOT." Q:      "IN THE PLAY (WAITING FOR GODOT) PRACTICALLY NOTHING HAPPENS. THERE IS NOTHING DONE IN IT; NO DEVELOPMENT IS TO BE FOUND: AND THERE IS NO BEGINNING AND NO END." DISCUSS THIS VIEW. Ans: When Waiting for Godot was first presented on the stage, it offered to theatre- audiences an experience unknown before. It was a new kind of play, a play which broke entirely fresh ground. It was a wholly unconventional dramatic composition. It was unconventional in respect of its character-portrayal as well as its plot-construction. It was unconventional also in not depicting any dramatic conflict in the accepted sense of the word. In fact, there was an all-round deficiency of action, characteriz...

Q:       WAITING    FOR   GODOT IS A PLAY IN WHICH "NOTHING HAPPENS, TWICE." DISCUSS. Q:      COMMENT     ON     THE PAUCITY OF INCIDENT AND SITUATION IN "WAITING FOR GODOT." Q:      "IN THE PLAY (WAITING FOR GODOT) PRACTICALLY NOTHING HAPPENS. THERE IS NOTHING DONE IN IT; NO DEVELOPMENT IS TO BE FOUND: AND THERE IS NO BEGINNING AND NO END." DISCUSS THIS VIEW. Ans: When Waiting for Godot was first presented on the stage, it offered to theatre- audiences an experience unknown before. It was a new kind of play, a play which broke entirely fresh ground. It was a wholly unconventional dramatic composition. It was unconventional in respect of its character-portrayal as well as its plot-construction. It was unconventional also in not depicting any dramatic conflict in the accepted sense of the word. In fact, there was an all-round deficiency of action, characteriz...