07/04/2024
The Major Plays of Samuel Beckett
ENDGAME (1958)
Synopsis
Hamm and Clov
In a wheel-chair sits Hamm, who is blind. Hamm's parents. Nell and Nagg, both legless as the result of a cycling accident are in two ashbins. The only character who can walk is Hamm's servant Clov who, however, cannot sit down. Clov is trying to leave Hamm who persistently bullies him, making him push his chair round, open and shut the ashbins, and look through the windows with a telescope. Hamm's mother, Nell, probably dies but this is not made clear. Hamm continues a story, the one he has been telling himself all his days. Clov retires to change into travelling clothes while Hamm discards his possessions one by one and settles back in his chair, covering his face with a blood-stained handkerchief. Clov appears at the door, with umbrella and bag, ready to leave, but as the curtain falls he is still standing on the threshold watching Hamm.
Critical Comments***
Clov's First Action, a Metaphor For Waking Up
Endgame is played out in a single room. Of the four characters, only Clov can move. He has a stiff-legged gait and is unable to sit down. His master, Hamm, is blind and paralysed in a wheel-chair Hamm's parents, Nagg and Nell, are legless and dumped in dust-bins. When the curtain rises both Hamm and the dust-bins are covered with dust-sheets and the curtains are drawn across the windows. Clov's first act is to draw back the curtains, look mockingly at the world outside, and then take off the dust-sheets. This is so plainly a metaphor for waking up that we imagine the stage to be the inside of an immense skull.
A Tragi-Farce
In this play there is no mysterious Mr. Godot who might, if he ever turned up, solve the problems of the protagonists. There is, in fact, no one at all waiting in the
wings; all the ingredients of the tragi-farce are present when the curtain goes up.
Samuel Beckett and the Theatre of the Absurd
Absurd Drama, Not a Regular "Movement"
The phrase "Absurd Drama" or "The Theatre of the Absurd" gained currency as a result of Martin Esslin's book The Theatre of the Absurd published in 1961. Esslin points out that there is no such thing as a regula "movement of Absurd dramatists; the term is useful as "a device to make certain fundamental traits which seem to be present in the works of a number of dramatists accessible to discussion by tracing features they have in common." Esslin's book deals with a group of plays which incorporate certain beliefs and use certain methods and which, briefly and as a kind of intellectual shorthand, we call Absurd Drama.
Successful Inspite of the Violation of all Dramatic Conventions
The most surprising thing about plays of this group is that inspite of their breaking of the rules they are successful. Says Esslin: "If a good play must have a cleverly constructed story, these have no story or plot to speak of; if a good play is judged by subtlety of characterisation and motivation, these are often without recognisable characters and present the audience with almost mechanical puppets; if a good play has to have a fully explained theme, which is neatly exposed and finally solved, these often have neither a beginning nor an end; if a good play is to hold the mirror up to nature and portray the manners and mannerisms of the age in finely observed sketches, these seem often to be reflections of dreams and nightmares; if a good play relies on witty repartee and pointed dialogue, these often consist of incoherent babblings."
The Major "Absurd" Dramatists
This kind of play, according to Esslin, arises from the disillusionment and loss of "certitude characteristic of our times and reflected in works like The Myth of Sisyphus (1942) by Albert Camus-where the word "Absurd" appears. The major dramatists of the School of the Absurd, in Esslin's view are Beckett, Adamov, Ionesco, and Genet. The senselessness of life and loss of ideals had, of course, been reflected in dramatists like Giraudoux, Anouilh, Sartre, and Camus, but, whereas they had presented irrationality in terms of the old conventions, dramatists in the Theatre of the Absurd sought a more appropriate form. They do not argue about absurdity; they "present it in being." Like the Poetic Theatre, the Absurd Theatre relies heavily on dream and fantasy, but unlike that theatre it rejects consciously "poetic" dialogue in favour of the banal. Although centred on Paris, the Theatre of the Absurd is distinctly international in flavour, as is emphasised by the four leading exponents chosen by Esslin-the Irish Beckett, the Russian Adamov, the Rumanian Ionesco, and the Frenchman Genet. These dramatists are followed, in Esslin's book, by about eighteen contemporary playwrights of whom Pinter and Simpson are the British representatives. All these dramatists partake, in one form or another, of the tradition of the Absurd which is described by Esslin as very far-flung indeed, incorporating devices from the circus, mime, clowning, verbal nonsense, and the literature of dream and fantasy which often has a strong allegorical component. Esslin seems to have overstated his case by including many dramatists whose mention in the category of the Theatre of the Absurd surprises us. But the tradition is more obviously pertinent when Esslin approaches such persons as Jarry, Apollinaire, and Dada. In his attempt to show in what way the Absurd Theatre produces something really new, Esslin suggests that it is "the unusual way in which various familiar attitudes of mind and literary idioms are interwoven" and the fact that this approach has met with "a wide response from a broadly based public."
Waiting for Godot-A Summary
ACT I
Two Tramps Waiting for the Unknown Godot.
"Nothing to be Done"
The scene is a country road. The time is evening. Estragon, sitting on a low mound near a tree, is struggling to take off one of his boots and temporarily gives up his effort, feeling exhausted. He resumes the struggle and fails again. Vladimir appears and Estragon says: "Nothing to be done." Vladimir, hearing the remark, says that he too is coming round to the same opinion. He too, after many efforts, had realised that he had not yet tried everything, and so he resumed the struggle. Then he asks Estragon where he spent the night. Estragon says that he spent the night in a ditch and that he was beaten as usual by the same lot of persons. Vladimir says that, but for him, there is no knowing where Estragon would be; but for Vladimir, Estragon would be nothing more than a little heap of bones at this moment. Vladimir then recalls the time, long long ago, when the two of them used to be presentable persons coming down hand in hand from the top of the Eiffel top o Tower. Now it is too late for them to repair their fortunes. They would not even be allowed now to go up the Tower. Estragon draws Vladimir's attention to latter's open fly and asks him to button it. Vladimir agrees that one should not neglect the little things of life, adding: "Hope deferred maketh the something sick." Vladimir then takes off his hat, peers into it, feels about inside it, shakes it, puts it on again and says: "Nothing to be done. ***"
Mutual Resentment and Affection Between the Two Men
Estragon falls asleep, but Vladimir awakens him. Estragon asks why Vladimir does not let him sleep. Vladimir replies that he was feeling lonely. Estragon says that he had just seen a dream which he would like to tell to Vladimir, but Vladimir says that he would definitely not like to hear Estragon's nightmares. Estragon says that there are times when he thinks that the two of them should part company. Vladimir says that Estragon would hardly be able to look after himself alone. Estragon says that the separation might really prove to be too bad. Estragon then asks if Vladimir knows the story of the Englishman in the brothel. But Vladimir is not interested in this story. Estragon asks if Vladimir is angry with him. He begs Vladimir's forgiveness and places his hand on Vladimir's shoulder. He then wants to embrace Vladimir. Vladimir is stiff at first but he quickly softens. They then embrace, but Estragon shrinks back saying that Vladimir stinks of garlic. Vladimir explains that he takes garlic for the sake of his kidneys.
What is Expected of Godot
Vladimir says that he is curious to know what Godot has to offer to them because then they would know whether to accept the offer or refuse it. Estragon wants to know what exactly Vladimir had asked Godot for. Vladimir asks if Estragon was not present at the time. Estragon says that he was not probably listening to the talk. Vladimir then says that they had not asked Godot for anything very definite. Estragon thinks that what they had said to Godot was a kind of prayer, a vague supplication. Vladimir says that Godot's reply was that he would see and that he would have to think it over. Perhaps Godot wanted to consult his family (says Vladimir), his friends (says Estragon), his agents (says Vladimir), his correspondents (says Estragon), his But books (says Vladimir), his bank account (says Estragon), before taking a decision. To Estragon's question whether they have no rights any more, Vladimir replies that they have got rid of their rights. Estragon asks if they are tied to anything. But Vladimir asks Estragon to become alert because he thinks, from the sounds of shouting, that Godot has come. But there is no Godot. The sound was that of the wind blowing through the reeds.
Waiting for Godot-Critical Approaches
Beckett's View of the Human Condition
The production of Waiting for Godot was regarded by some critics as a great landmark in the history of the English theatre, although others looked at it as one more example of the literary anarchy of the present century Beckett's subsequent plays made this initial conflict of opinion even sharper and more fierce, and indeed his development since Waiting for Godot made that play seem almost traditional in its methods and hopeful in its philosophy One subsequent work, entitled Play, denies his characters the power of movement completely, and consists of one Act which is repeated to form the second Act. It is possible, by piecing together various critical points of view, to see Waiting for Godor as a coherent dramatic statement of Beckett's view of the human condition.
Unconventional Play
The play conveys its message by an extension of the dramatic methods introduced by such dramatists as Strindberg, Chekhov, and Pirandello. There is no narrative sequence; meaning emerges only fitfully from the apparently inconsequential dialogue; apparently pointless remarks take on metaphysical overtones by being repeated in different situations; and the conclusion is inconclusive.
The Universality of the Tramps' State
Two pathetic figures, possibly tramps though even this is not stated, wai beside a tree for a mysterious figure with whom, Vladimir asserts and Estragon believes, they have an appointment. The name of this mysterious figure, who they feel will in some way change their lives for the better, is Godot. They do not know the time or place of this appointment, nor do the know what Godot looks like. Nevertheless Vladimir strongly believes that he has indeed such an appointment, and Estragon has neither the energy nor the intelligence to contradict him, though he occasionally expresses a rather spiteful scepticism which greatly embarrasses Vladimir. While they wait they reminisce, reflect, and argue; their thoughts and words reveal their pas life to be meaningless, to be a matter for mild regret merely. They both try evade this truth and Vladimir, in particular, hopes that Godot is going to ge their lives a purpose and a meaning. Vladimir, disturbed by doubts as the authenticity of the Biblical narrative of the Redemption, maintains hop only by ignoring certain areas of experience. "Don't tell me". he yells wwho Estragon tries to narrate one of his dreams. Dreams, perhaps, represent the innate evil of life which Vladimir must ignore, or at least they are uncontrollable and therefore disturbing. Beckett's great achievement in the play is to suggest the universality of the state represented by Vladimir and Estragon.
