Beckett illustrates throughout his plays that words are incapable of expressing the inner self but language is intrinsic to the humans, thus able to construct identity. His formlessness is merely phenomenal because it masks a highly organized structure. (Velissariu, p.46)
Beckett has developed the dramaturgy around verbal constructs of condensed meaning, capable of articulating visually both silence and absence. In this context the language to which he appeals does not convey the essence of things, but it accepts the reality and its own degradation. (Velissariu, p.46)
Godot’s identity: religion, desire, and purposive movement – Life as meaningless routine – Forms of life-affirmation: humor, play, and parodic repartee
Through “Waiting for Godot”, Samuel Becket manages concepts such as divinity (absence/presence), enjoyments (positivism/negativism) and purposive movement to define the individuals living their drama.
In the play, Beckett embodies specific binary contrasts.. Vladimir (Didi) and Estragon (Gogo) stand in opposition to Godot as they are present and Godot is physically absent. Thus, they are in a binary relation, incapable of dissociation because they are referential one to another. (Estragon: “We’re not tied!.. /Vladimir:But to whom? By whom?, /Estragon: To your man” – Beckett, pp.20-21)
The lack of “positivism” in the reality compels language to enter a process of self-repudiation. Thus, the recurrence of the familiar word “happy” appears to render into a menace for both speaker and listener. “Estragon: I’m unhappy/ Vladimir: Not really! Since when?/ Estragon: I’d forgotten/ Vladimir: Extraordinary the tricks that memory plays! (Beckett 50)
In the pay “silence” and “pause” are elements which undermine the emotions and prevent individuals from commitment. Silence breaks the continuity of words and conveys meaning in its totality. Vladimir and Estragon’s dialogue about the dead voices, fills the scene with the presence of fragmented whispers, and this event overwhelms the two because of their nature as “dead humans”. In this context, the dead voices are heard inside their silences discussing on past and dreams and Estragon repeats „like leaves”, „they rustle” emphasizing the noise they produce (Beckett, 96)
The statement “Let’s go” is followed by “They do not move” (Beckett, p.86), fact that disrupts the causality between language and gesture. Pozzo: (having lit his pipe): “The second is never so sweet (he takes the pipe out of his mouth, contemplates it).. as the first, I mean (He puts the pipe back in his mouth) But it’s sweet just the same” (Becket, pp.28-29)
The repetitiveness of the actions in the play is a sign of the repetitiveness of Vladimir and Estragon’s life. The monotony is depicted in Estragon’s requests to leave and it is followed by Vladimir stating that they are waiting for Godot, a religious figure. However, even admitting his inability of moving, Pozzo does actually manage to leave while Vladimir and Estragon remain fixed.
Vladimir recognizes his state of immobility when deciding to help Pozzo. „Let us not waste our time in idle discourse! Let us do something, while we have the chance!” (Becket, 133) This call to action appears to be an urgent attitude against the inaction he and Estragon have been practicing throughout the play; however, Vladimir takes a lot of time helping Pozzo to his feet. „all mankind is us, whether we like it or not.” (Beckett, 132), „Let’s go. We can’t. Ah!” (Beckett, 156)
Vladimir and Estragon’s incapacity to proceed renders them unable to determine their own fates as they both wait for Godot act upon them. „Yes, let’s go” (Beckett, 86). Godot is assembled with God, living in a freedom uncontrolled by temporal restrictions while the main characters, Vladimir and Estragon are deprived of it.
Recursive words are illustrated in Estragon’s discourse „Estragon: The circus. Vladimir: The music-hall. Estragon: The circus.” (Becket, 50) as well as in Vladimir’s case who sings each verse twice, describing their senseless lives.
Moreover, relating to the divine part of the play, Estragon associates himself with „Adam” and with Christ, „all my life I’ve compared myself to him.” (Beckett, 83), but he does not hold the strength to achieve independence.
As words gradually acquire independence, they are liberated to interact. Estragon and Vladimir play with them, treating the same word as its opposite.
When referring to Lucky’s speech, it is based precisely upon a circular movement of language from its initial stage of exemplary articulation (scientific hypothesis) to its final decay (childish gibberish). In Act II, Lucky has lost the ability to articulate words and definitively regressed to the animal condition which his role as slave implies. But astonishingly enough, Luck’s deterioration is not accomplished by an concomitant increase in Pozzo’s status as master. Pozzo’s loss of articulacy and of sight does not allow him to perceive either the passage of time or the change of place. Hence Pozzo’s outburst to Vladimir:
Pozzo: (suddenly furious) “Have you not done tormenting me with your accursed time! It’s abominable! When! … One day.. like any other day, one day he went dumb, one day I 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, p.89)
He reacts violently when relating to“yesterday “ and “tomorrow” because language has ceased the connection to experience. In the past he derived authority from using properly the language. Thus, the Pozzo of Act 1 was one of the “old style” whose vocabulary was enriched with a variety of synonyms: “impress” is rejected for “mollify” and this in turn for “cod” so that he could accurately express himself: “Why he doesn’t make himself comfortable? Let’s try and get it clear. Has he not the right to? Certainly he has. It follows that he doesn’t want to. There’s reasoning for you” (Beckett, p.31)
In conclusion,“Waiting for Godot” inaugurates the project which underpins all of Beckett’s subsequent drama: the search for self and meaning in terms of dramatic language. Beckett sways between the poles of presence and absence, self and other. “Waiting for Godot” is thus not only a recurrent expression but also the motif of salvation from immobility the humanity.
Bibliography
Samuel Beckett, “Waiting for Godot”, London: Faber and Faber, 1978
Aspasia Velissariou, “Language in “Waiting for Godot”, Journal of Beckett Studies, No 8 (Autumn, 1982), pp.45-57 (13 pages)