Waiting for Godot discussion

welll,,,, may be the title of this tragicomidy,,,will not attract you ,,,and infact that was what happend to me when I first red the book
who is Godo it ?????????
pls read it and fiond what i found



its really grat

I didn't like it! I read it, studied it in French class and even played Vladimir in a play but I didn't like it :(

It`s one of my favorite plays. At the age of 16 I was invited to play the part of the messenger by the local theater group but it conflicted with my more important position of stock boy at the local Bradlees store. The only consolation I had in my adult life for the bad decision is that my name means ¨messenger from God¨.

I didn't like it because when I was reading it was so BORING, repetitious, and the stage directions were sooo overwhelming. I prefer the more classic plays filled with action and that have a plot.

I'm really glad I read this while I was still in school. When I first started reading it I thought it was stupid and pointless. Then when my literature teacher started a discussion about it I was in awe at how amazing this play is. I found it very influential and thought provoking. It changed me permanently when I realized that we are all here on this world just waiting. All the tasks we fill our daily lives with are just to "pass the time" the way the two main characters were. We are all waiting for "Godot" until we die. This play is about life itself and its meaning. I love it!

I know the main features: repetition, lack of communication, the everlasting repetition, habits, tragedies... I know them all. But I still didn't like the play. It's just not my style. It BORE me to death! Sorry

chris-
What is the significance of the title ¨Waiting for Godot¨. IN your own words, who are they wating for. think metaphorically.

Geoffrey wrote: "chris-
What is the significance of the title ¨Waiting for Godot¨. IN your own words, who are they wating for. think metaphorically."

"Waiting" for Godot leaves for the reader a sort of eagerness to keep reading to see if they will find Godot, so it is like the essence of the story. Second it has a lot of interpretations (Becket even states that he doesn't even know who Godot is) some say they are waiting for God (GODot) other say it's death or salvation...

Or a Messiah? Godot, son of God. The interpretations are multiple, but the one true constant is the religious nature of the quest.

But still, if the book has a meaning it doesn't mean that I should love it!

We`re not asking you to love it. We are asking you to understand it.

Chris wrote: "Geoffrey wrote: "chris-
What is the significance of the title ¨Waiting for Godot¨. IN your own words, who are they wating for. think metaphorically."

"Waiting" for Godot leaves for the reader a so..."

Well put. I thought of the same thing. The anticipation and expectation.

There's also the whole issue of futility. Absurdism as a movement is about the futility of the human endeavor if nothing else. That's why they wait for something that never comes, and everything they do amounts to nothing...

If you want to boil it down it down, the text is about the futility of the Western preoccupation with expectation.

Looking to the future is one of the major preoccupations of Western culture. The driving force and main selling points of Western religion is the expectation of something better to come for the faithful. This text highlights the absurdity of this preoccupation by rending their "wait" futile. We see the idiocy of this preoccupation as Godot fails to materialize.

Beckett is not trying to fill the reader or audience with expectation, but instead trying to highlight its futility. Godot primarily represents a religious figure or a god, but he also represents the entirety of the human endeavor as well.

We are all waiting, or we all will be waiting someday or another for some Godot to come to us. We don't know who he is. We have no idea what he wants. We will just sit there and wait for it to come.

This book, without anylising it symbolically, is really really boring. But the meaning behind the repetitiveness and the Absurdity is amazing.

Endgame is far superior in my view. But remember these are stage plays, they're meant to be heard aloud not read silently to the self. You can't get the rhythm of the delivery right alone as compared with 4 actors doing it and if you can't get the rhythm right, you can't get the poetry

I found it odd, not in a particularly good or bad way, just odd. there wasn't really much of a plot although dialogue somewhat Forrest Gump-esque.

What is the purpose of life, my life?

I’d like it to make an interesting read. Is this too banal or too ambitious?

The latter – according to Beckett.

Life, in and of itself, has no meaning, no purpose, and amounts to waiting for Godot. Hence, the play embraces life entire.

And to those who demand beat, action and a guitar solo I’ll rephrase the play in the Pink Floyd fashion: no one told you when to run, you missed the starting gun. Take care and take note: what you have now ain’t dress rehearsal – this is the real deal.

Hi Burinodijete! I completely concur with you.Absurdist plays are definitely not for everyone.I absolutely LOVED reading "Waiting for Godot".Beckett's "binary" method of narration as well as his purposeful ignorance of the spatio-temporal aspects of our world,promote a sense of uniqueness,intrigue and an extreme amount of profundity to his works.I also had the immense pleasure of actually watching "Endgame" enacted by the Dublin Theater company.It was an amazing experience.

Alex wrote: "What is the purpose of life, my life?

I’d like it to make an interesting read. Is this too banal or too ambitious?

The latter – according to Beckett.

Life, in and of itself, has no meaning, no p..."

Nice juxtaposition Alex,

Your comments are also quite adroite. I would add that for Beckett life also entails searching for masters to guide us, suffering, squabbling and unfounded anticipation and hope...endless, meaningless hope for a redemption that will never come.

Marc wrote: "Endgame is far superior in my view. But remember these are stage plays, they're meant to be heard aloud not read silently to the self. You can't get the rhythm of the delivery right alone as compar..."

I agree, that Beckett's Endgame should be heard on audio, or seen and heard in the Irish video series of his complete plays (total blasphemy but worth watching). That Endgame is considered "far superior" to Waiting for Godot by some is a point worth noting. Historically, Waiting for Godot blew the doors off of contemporary theater in the 1950's and will be the play for which Beckett will primarily be remembered. There is nothing like Lucky's speech ever to be witnessed again in the theater, unless we get another amazing wordsmith like Beckett to bless us with his/her language games.

I don't remember where I originally found out about this play, it may have been from a list of top existential plays (in which this was first).

I love it, easily top 5 plays I've ever read!

As to who (or what) Godot is?
I think it's freedom.
Freedom to escape a fate that you may or may not be aware of.

The two guys, Estragon and Vladimir, they are stuck by an obligation that they think "Godot" will bring them a better life.
I think (and it would ruin the purpose if they left) to just move on from the road in search of work, they'd have won their freedom and escaped their fate.

That's the entire point of the existential movement!

For some reason I feel like too much emphasis has been placed on Godot. To me, it doesn't really matter who or what Godot is, what is important is the waiting. The endless waiting that humans must endure and the different ways they interact when having to wait.

Beckett plays with time and memory in virtually all of his work, for Beckett and his characters time and memory appear fluid and non-linear, he sees life as one long present moment ... the past is uncertain and the future is unknowable all that is left the 'eternal present'. I think godot stands for that search and desire we all have for the elusive tomorrow that will resolve the confusing past and give light to the future but here is where Beckett takes his cue from Joyce "There is not past, no future everything flows in an eternal present".

I agree with beckett that time and memory are fluid and non-linear (think RAM on computers for how our own memories are stored), but I don't agree that means everything is an eternal present of the now.

The interesting consequence this has for narrative is that we read stories in books, yet our own life is anything but a story. We may seek to impose some sort of narrative structure on our own lives, but it's artificial and arbitrary. We live every day, one after the other (something Beckett portrays very well in his shorter plays) and to group them together as a phase or stage in our life is our feeble attempt to give our lives some coherent meaning. It's the absurdity, the emptiness and the sheer hollow theatricality of human life that Beckett conveys so wonderfully.

Waiting for Godot is phenomenal. I agree that Beckett portrays the sense of an eternal present; or, perhaps, that we are "terminally alive."

Although I love thinking about artificial intelligence, I think comparing memory to data storage in computers may be overstated. I think, first, one needs to be able to have sensations--a central nervous system--in order for conditioning to take place.

Leland wrote: "Waiting for Godot is phenomenal. I agree that Beckett portrays the sense of an eternal present; or, perhaps, that we are "terminally alive."

Although I love thinking about artificial intelligen..."

I wouldn't disagree with that, but I'm talking more about how those memories are stored, ie what gets stored and what details are lost in the necessary editing process that forms part of the storing process. And then the cross-currents of the now that influence the retrieval of the original memory, to infuse it with a different quality perhaps from the one when it was originally put into memory. Why this memory, why now and why this why of recalling it?

I'd love to know what your theory on dreams is

I need some advice on this. I've started reading this play and gone through several pages. So far, I have no clue as to what the conversation is about. Is there background information I need to know in order to get the gist of it? Is it meant to be ambiguous so as to be left open for interpretation? Any advice without spoilers please?

Mohammed wrote: "I need some advice on this. I've started reading this play and gone through several pages. So far, I have no clue as to what the conversation is about. Is there background information I need to kno..."

it's pretty much without externasl reference; Beckett creates worlds that solely exist on the stage where the plays are being performed. The drive of the narrative comes from the relationship of the characters in their dialogue.

Thanks Marc. That's pretty much what I've expected

One of my favorite plays! Studied it at Uni...love it!

I saw a production of WFG at Liverpool Playhouse, circa 1973, directed, I think, by Andrew Dallmeyer; can't recall the names of the actors.

It was hilarious. Vladimir and Estragon were played just like Laurel & Hardy, which I think was Beckett's intention. There was a lot of slapstick humour, much of it scripted (the mix-up over the bowler hats, for example) and some of the laughs put in just for the production. When Pozzo and Lucky came on for the first time, dressed like a pair of circus clowns, it was a pure hoot. Very camp and like something out of the Goon Show or Monty Python's.

The second half was less of a scream, as though we were seeing the sadness behind the humour. It was still funny, though. Still absurd. The ending was weird. You know there's this tree upstage centre? In a final tableau, Vladimir and Estragon (who still can't quite manage to go) raised their arms to mirror the branches of the tree. And there you had the crucifixion with V & E as the two thieves either side of Christ.

WFG should be seen as a tragi-comedy rather than a dour, serious piece of philosophising.

I think that last line is possibly true for all Beckett's work. He seemed amused at the human condition...

Hoor wrote: "welll,,,, may be the title of this tragicomidy,,,will not attract you ,,,and infact that was what happend to me when I first red the book
who is Godo it ?????????
pls read it and fiond what i found..."

may I Know what is the massage of this play....??I am so confused about I was so anxious before reading it..but.........

There is no massage in this play, whether of the Swedish or even the Shaitsu school. Anyone looking for 'massage' should try unblocking their adult filter.

if no any massage then what was special in it

zamra wrote: "if no any massage then what was special in it"

language, world, it's a play for the theatre and sets up its own unique theatrical world which resonates with our own. It's message like much of Beckett is the desperate absurdity and humour of human existence

Marc wrote: "zamra wrote: "if no any massage then what was special in it"

language, world, it's a play for the theatre and sets up its own unique theatrical world which resonates with our own. It's message lik..."

it means he has tried to show that how piffles we human are,we sometimes wait for the things about which we do not even know that either they exist or do not at all..........

zamra wrote: "Marc wrote: "zamra wrote: "if no any massage then what was special in it"

language, world, it's a play for the theatre and sets up its own unique theatrical world which resonates with our own. It'..."

yep

hmmmmmmmmmmmm okay.....

The most boring book I have come across

Funny how those who describe literature negatively, tend to describe what they fear most about how other people might regard their own personality.

I liked the repetition.

This was the WORST book I have ever read. 45 minutes of my life I'll never get back.

Liv wrote: "This was the WORST book I have ever read. 45 minutes of my life I'll never get back."

Hi Liv

Three points on your review of Waiting for Godot:

1) I wish that I had your life. You must live in a beer commercial for book readers. I really liked the book and even laughed out loud.

2) You are also a very fast reader. I've read Waiting for Godot several times and seen it twice (First English language play that I ever saw live.) I've never managed to get through it in 45 minutes.

3) I gave it five stars. Sorry if people like me have misled you and we're sorry about the wasted 45 minutes. NEVER TRUST ANY OF MY REVIEWS. Happy reading!! (Really)

amazing,this word cant describe what happened in the play.but well awesome that all i can say..

It's hard for me to even describe why I love this play because it's so weird. It's funny, random, and probaly packed with messages- or maybe it isn't! I really need to see this play performed..

I was invited at the tender age of 16 to act the part of the messenger. As my first name means messenger of God, the part had especial meaning for me. And as the part had only a few lines, would've been a cinch. As it was, I was working in after school hours and couldn't accept the part.

Godot's meaning is very clear to me and I am a bit surprised as to how few people understand it. I wonder how difficult it must be for Christians who already have their Messiah to realize the import of the Godot personage.

Geoffrey wrote: "I was invited at the tender age of 16 to act the part of the messenger. As my first name means messenger of God, the part had especial meaning for me. And as the part had only a few lines, would've..."

Yeah, I can certainly see the Christian themes in this play. To me, it just seems that there are so many different ways that it could be interpreted. While Godot can definitely be a God figure (I like to think that he is), the ambiguous nature of the work really makes me want to keep my mind open to many different interpretations. Who knows? Maybe Beckett made the play as it is for the sake of letting readers interpret it. Either way, I think it's a fantastic play- I'd jump at the chance to see it performed.

I did eventually see the play that I was supposed to act in. It was a mediocre production of amateur local actors. Regardless, everyone enjoyed putting it on and I only wished that I had taken the opportunity to be God's special emissary.

Yes, it's ambiguity enhances its perplexing meaning and intrigues us. Ultimately, Beckett addresses the issue that we humans look for exterior agents for our enhanced happiness, ie. the need for a personal God. And in this simple allegorical manner, he presents us with a momentous universal truth of our inadequate self-fulfillment without that agent. I would liken this play to THE CASTLE by Kafka and if had ever I done a program in comparative literature, these two literary works would've been good choices.