WAITING FOR GODOT Various human relationships
In ‘Waiting for Godot’ we have the two
major relationships which mainly constitute the central theme of the drama.
Inspite of Vladimir-Estragon relationship and Puzzo-Lucky relationship we have
in this play the absent Godot’s relationship with these characters and with his
servant boy. We have to judge how these relationships form the fabric of the
drama.
Vladimir
and Estragon are the two main figures of the play. Estragon seems to be a
cowardly person who suffers from nightmarish visions. So he needs the care and
guardianship of his friend and really can not do anything without him. Vladimir on the other hand
is certainly more intelligent and more alert than Estragon. But inspite of that
he is more or less a pathetic character finding himself quite himself and
feeling compelled indefinitely to wait for Godot who is likely to bring about a
change in the present situation but whose arrival seems to be very doubtful.
Both Estragon and Vladimir
represent the ordeal of waiting. They also represent ignorance, helplessness,
impotence and boredom. They do not have the essential knowledge; they do not
know who exactly Godot is; they do not know what Godot will do for them; they
do not know what would happen if they stopped waiting for Godot. They are
forced to resort to various devices to pass time but each attempt sizzles out.
This passing of the time is a mutual obsession with the two men. Nothingness is
what these tramps are fighting against, and nothingness is the reason why they
keep talking. The condition of the two helpless individuals is the condition of
everyman.
Vladimir-Estragon relationship
symbolizes a relationship of naturalistics. Occasionally the two tramps talk of
parting but never take the suggestion seriously. They illustrate the bond of
understanding. They are full of frustration and resentment, but they cling to
each other with a mixture of interdependence and affection deriving comfort
from calling each other by the childish names ‘Gogo’ and ‘Didi’. Again they are
incapable of anything more than mere beginnings of impulse, desires, thoughts,
moods, memories and impressions. Vladimir
compares their proud past with their gloomy present now and then.
Vladimir
and Estragon are the distinct individuals and Estragon are the distinct
individuals having different characters, attitudes and temperaments. They are
alive in a non-world. In spite of their inaction and pointlessness of their
existence these two men still want to go on like millions of people who want to
go even when their life becomes pointless.
The theme of the disintegration and
regression is mainly symbolized by Puzzo-Lucky relationship. Puzzo and Lucky
symbolize the relationship between capital and labour or between wealth and the
artist. Some critics tell us that Puzzo is no other than Godot himself.
According to this view Godot is God and Puzzo is, therefore, God. Some critics
also are of the view that while Puzzo and Lucky may be body and intellect,
master and slave, capitalist and proletariat, colonizer and colonized, cain and
Abel, sadist and inasochist, Joyce and Beckett, they represent essentially and
more simply one way of getting through life with someone else. Just as Vladimir and Estragon,
more sympathically another way of doing so.
The relationship between Puzzo and
Lucky is reflected in the physical bond that holds them together—the link of
the rope. The relationship between them is that of dominant and the dominating,
though in the second act it takes on the another aspect that of the dumb
leading the blind. The relationship also represents the exploitation of the social
life where Puzzo is one of the haves, dinning on chiken and wine, while Lucky
is the have-not to whom he throws the gnawed bones. The drudgery and inhuman
treatment have reduced Lucky to the level of an animal. Lucky has to bear all
sorts of bags and bagges. But he is not treated as a man. So he is below the
level of animals, rather a mere machine in some respect.
Lucky and Puzzo create a metaphor of
society. Although Puzzo and Lucky present an obvious and sharp contrast to each
other. They have one thing in common—They are both driven by a desperate
attempt to avoid panic which would ruin them if they lost their belief. It
becomes more and more evident in the course of the play that Lucky believes
that his safety his only with the pattern of a mutual sadomasochiastic
relationship between them. Moreover, Puzzo-Lucky pair may be compared to the
collective pseudo-ego.
One critic is of the view that Puzzo
represents mankind and Lucky represents Christ. If this view is accepted what
takes place before the tramps is the reacting of the Rdemption. Another
possible interpretation is that Puzzo represents the psychological aspect of
human personality and Lucky the spiritual which is in time brutalized by the
treatment.
Moreover, Godot seems to be some sort
of medieval land-lord. He has agents and correspondents working for him; he has
a shepherd who rears the sheep and a goatherd who rears the goats. Actually
Godot is capricious in his relationship, he beats the one but loves the other.
The tramps are afraid of Godot, so is the boy. Thus Godot rules through fear.
Thus, these three inter-relationships
are very much significant from the dramatic point of view. The tramps’ waiting
symbolizes humanity’s vain hope of salvation. Moreover, the meaninglessness and
the helplessness which are the main issues of the drama are focused by these
relations.
Comments
Post a Comment