Andrew O’Tuama (08481512 20th Century Drama 1

Essay: Waiting for Godot by Samuel Beckett

Samuel Beckett’s Waiting for Godot, an example of the theatre of the absurd is by no

means a traditional drama. Beckett does not follow “the tradition which demands that a play

have an exposition, a climax and a dénouement” (Worton 69), and instead creates a play

which has no action, no character development, and the only plot is that two men, named

Estragon and Vladimir, are waiting for a man named Godot, who may or may not arrive. It is

therefore difficult to examine this play in terms of character and plot, as it is essentially

lacking in both. However, despite this, Beckett’s play is a complex and fascinating one. In

order to appreciate this play close attention must be paid instead to dialogue, the actions and

movements of the characters, stage direction and particularly repetition and relationships

between characters. In this essay I will analyse the opening of the play to Estragon’s line and

stage direction: ‘I’m going’ [He does not move.].

This scene introduces many of the main themes and dynamics of the play. Unlike in a

traditional play, it does nothing in terms of establishing a background, location or plot, as

these are not important elements of Godot. The play opens with a description of the scene: [A

country road. A tree. Evening.] The bareness of the scene is an important point to note. As

well as functioning as a metaphorical image for the emptiness, the nothingness that is central

to the play, it also emphasises the one of the central elements of the play: time and place are

meaningless and irrelevant in Godot. This is not a play that deals with a story that takes place

in a particular setting. It is a play that deals not with particulars, but with humanity. Just like

the description of the scene, we are given similarly vague descriptions of the central

characters. In this scene we are told only that Estragon is wearing boots, without socks, and

that Vladimir wears a hat. This reinforces the idea that this is not a play of specifics. “Who”
Andrew O’Tuama (08481512 20th Century Drama 2

these characters are has no real significance. What is important is what they say and do, as

well as how they interact.

The first line of the play is Estragon’s; “Nothing to be done” (Beckett 9), he says as

he gives up his struggle to remove his boot. Though a seemingly innocuous throwaway

statement, this line (which is repeated in various forms throughout the play) is of central

significance to the play. Godot essentially deals with meaninglessness; the meaninglessness

of action, of language, and of time, and Estragon’s opening line, and the subsequent

“struggle” with his boot that occurs in this scene is a metaphor for this meaninglessness. This

is reinforced when Estragon finally succeeds in removing the boot later in the scene and

examines it to find what it was that was causing his discomfort: [He looks inside it, feels

about inside it, turns it upside down, shakes it...]. When Vladimir asks him what he found he

replies “nothing” (Beckett 11). Estragon’s “struggle”, as Vladimir refers to it, came to

nothing. Nothing was achieved, and he remains in the same position as he began in. This

cycle of events reoccurs throughout the play. In fact, the play itself is simply a repeat of this

cycle on a larger scale; the play begins with the two men waiting, nothing really happens

during its course, and by its conclusion the men are in the very same position as they started

in. In this way the opening scene, and the opening line, introduces the central theme of the

play.

However, despite his defeatist opening statement and his recognition of the futility of

his efforts, Estragon is relentless in his struggle. This action reveals another central issue of

the play: despite the ultimate meaninglessness of our actions, we still do them, for we have no

alternative; it presents human aspiration as simultaneously futile and essential. The ordeal

with the boot could be seen as a metaphor for the play itself. These characters wait for Godot;

who Godot actually is bears no significance in the context of the play, he represents a

“function rather than a meaning. He stands for what keeps us chained to and in existence”
Andrew O’Tuama (08481512 20th Century Drama 3

(Worton 71). Just like Estragon’s boot, Godot is merely what occupies the characters at one

particular moment, what they are striving for, and just like the boot, it would seem that

Beckett knows that whether or not Godot does eventually arrive, it will be meaningless, it

will not ultimately change anything, they will repeat their cycle until death, and when that

comes, all their “struggles” will have been for nothing in the end.

Throughout this opening scene, the introduction of both these characters and their

interactions with each other reveal certain aspects about their relationship, but more

importantly about the nature of human relationships in general. Vladimir’s first words to

Estragon are “I’m glad you’re back. I thought you were gone for ever”, to which he responds

“Me too” (Beckett 9). This particular interaction reveals the fundamental importance of their

relationship. Though they bicker, fight and ignore each other on several occasions throughout

the play, the characters need each other, not just for company, but to affirm their own

existence. Without the other to respond and reply to, neither character can be certain of their

own existence, as we can see from Estragon’s response; without Vladimir with him, he too

believed he was “gone for ever”, and we must assume that without Estragon Vladimir himself

feels this way. Here Beckett is essentially re-stating George Berkeley’s philosophy “to be is

to be perceived” (Worton 72).

Time is another key theme of Waiting for Godot, which is dealt with in this scene.

When Vladimir offers to tell Estragon the story of the thieves from the Bible, Estragon

declines. Vladimir responds “It’ll pass the time” and proceeds (Beckett 12). This line sums up

these characters’ view of time. In the world of Godot, time does not pass naturally, but

characters must find a way of actively passing time (Worton 72). This becomes increasingly

evident throughout the play. The two men tell stories, idly chat and repeat scenarios and

conversations that have already occurred all in an effort to pass the time until Godot arrives.

Vladimir’s line “We should have thought of it a million years ago, in the nineties” (Beckett
Andrew O’Tuama (08481512 20th Century Drama 4

10) also hints at another significant aspect of time in Godot; the characters in the play have

no concept of the continuity of time. This is seen more clearly later in the play, particularly in

Pozzo’s speech in the second Act: “Have you done tormenting me with your accursed

time? ... One day like any other day, one day he went dumb, one day he went blind, one day

we’ll go deaf, one day we were born, one day we shall die, the same day, the same second”

(Beckett 89). Time in this play is simply a series of events that are seemingly unrelated.

In Michael Worton’s essay on Waiting for Godot and Endgame, he suggests that “as a

playwright, [Beckett] considers structure to be more important than any ‘message’ for the

communicative functioning of a play.” This is certainly evident in Godot. While the themes

mentioned above are hinted at through dialogue and metaphor in the opening scene, it is the

form and structure of the play that truly reflect these. One example of how this holds true in

Godot is Beckett’s use of repetition, which occurs several times during the first scene, both in

dialogue and in actions. The repetition of lines, such as the back-and-forth between Vladimir

and Estragon in this scene:

Vladimir: It hurts?
Estragon: Hurts! He wants to know if it hurts!
Vladimir: No one ever suffers but you. I don’t count. I’d like to hear what you’d say if you
had what I have.
Estragon: It hurts?
Vladimir: Hurts! He wants to know if it hurts! (Beckett 10)

echoes the theme presented by the metaphor of Estragon’s boot. Throughout the play such

repetition reoccurs, reflecting the idea that life is merely a series of ultimately futile repeated

events, yet, just as with the boots, the characters do, and must engage in these trivial

conversations as it is all they can do to pass the time.

The stage direction and instruction during the opening scene also demonstrate

Beckett’s use of structure as a key element in the “communicative functioning” of the play.

Throughout the opening scene the dialogue is interjected with pauses, and there is often
Andrew O’Tuama (08481512 20th Century Drama 5

silences instructed between questions and replies: “He broods, musing on the struggle”, “He

reflects” (Beckett 9), “Pause” (Beckett 11), “Silence” (Beckett 12). These silences occur

throughout the play and are crucial in deciphering its many key issues. The silences are a

physical representation of many of these issues. For example:

Vladimir: Suppose we repented.

the failures of language. Throughout Godot, Beckett dramatises the collapse of meaning and

language, and it is through silences such as the above that he captures this.

However more important is the way that these silences fragment the text, “making it a

series of discrete speeches and episodes rather than the seamless presentation of a dominant

idea”. By fragmenting the text in this way, the text is split into these individual “episodes”,

and reflects the concern shown throughout the play with time, and more importantly the

absence of continuity in a world where time is represented as merely fragments, disjointed

episodes that lack anything to hold them together. Memory, as Pozzo claims, is “defective”

(Beckett 38), and as such cannot be trusted. This is reflected in the opening scene as neither

character can recall their past. When asked if he had read the Bible, Estragon replies “The

Bible... I must have taken a look at it”. There is an absence of any semblance of memory or

evidence that these characters have had a past, as neither can recall even the previous day, as

we see in the second act.

Though Waiting for Godot cannot be examined in a traditional sense in terms of

character and plot, the opening scene contains many examples of how dialogue, movement,

stage direction, and imagery help to create a complex play, dealing with an array of themes

and issues, most notably the notion of meaninglessness, whether it be in reference to

language, action or life in general.

Works Cited:

 Beckett, Samuel, Waiting for Godot, Faber and Faber, 1990.

 Michael Worton, “‘Waiting for Godot’ and ‘Endgame’”, The Cambridge Companion

to Beckett, Ed. Pilling, John, Cambridge University Press, 1994.