20th Century English Literature

Vladimir - One of the two main characters of the play. Estragon calls him Didi, and the boy addresses him as Mr. Albert. He seems to be the more responsible and mature of the two main characters.

Estragon - The second of the two main characters. Vladimir calls him Gogo. He seems weak and helpless, always looking for Vladimir's protection. He also has a poor memory, as Vladimir has to remind him in the second act of the events that happened the previous night.

Pozzo - He passes by the spot where Vladimir and Estragon are waiting and provides a diversion. In the second act, he is blind and does not remember meeting Vladimir and Estragon the night before.

Lucky - Pozzo's slave, who carries Pozzo's bags and stool. In Act I, he entertains by dancing and thinking. However, in Act II, he is dumb.

Boy - He appears at the end of each act to inform Vladimir that Godot will not be coming that night. In the second act, he insists that he was not there the previous night.

Godot - The man for whom Vladimir and Estragon wait unendingly. Godot never appears in the play. His name are character are often thought to refer to God, changing the play's title and subject to Waiting for Godot.

Plots

Act I: Introduction & Pozzo and Lucky's Entrance

The beginning of the play establishes Vladimir and Estragon's relationship. Vladimir clearly realizes that Estragon is dependent on him when he tells Estragon that he would be "nothing more than a little heap of bones" without him. Vladimir also insists that Estragon would not go far if they parted. This dependency extends even to minute, everyday things, as Estragon cannot even take off his boot without help from Vladimir.

The beginning of the play makes Vladimir and Estragon seem interchangeable. For example, one of the characters often repeats a line that the other has previously said. This happens in the very beginning when the two characters switch lines in the dialogue, with each asking the other, "It hurts?" and responding, "Hurts! He wants to know if it hurts!" In addition to demonstrating the way that the two characters can be seen as interchangeable, this textual repetition will be found throughout the play as an indicator of the repetitiveness of life in general for Vladimir and Estragon.
Vladimir's discussion of the story of the two thieves brings up the question of textual uncertainty. He points out that the four gospels present entirely different versions of this story, and wonders why one of these versions is accepted as definitive. This question about the reliability of texts might cause the reader (or audience) of this play to question the reliability of this particular text. Also, the repetition of the story by the four gospels might allude to the repetitiveness of the action of the play.

The repetitiveness of the play is best illustrated by Estragon's repeated requests to leave, which are followed each time by Vladimir telling him that they cannot leave because they are waiting for Godot. The exact repetition of the lines each time this dialogue appears, including the stage directions, reinforces the idea that the same actions occur over and over again and suggests that these actions happen more times than the play presents.
In this beginning section we get the only clue of the nature of Vladimir and Estragon's relationship with Godot. They mention that they asked Godot for "a kind of prayer...a vague supplication," which he is currently considering. This creates a parallel between Godot and God, also suggested by their similar names, and it seems that Vladimir and Estragon do consider Godot a kind of religious figure when they mention coming in on their hands and knees.

Act I: Pozzo and Lucky Scene

Pozzo's statement about his pipe, that the second pipe is never as "sweet" as the first, can apply to experience in general--it suggests that feelings and events dull with repetition.
Repetition of events in the play is emphasized by further textual repetition. When Vladimir and Estragon alternate short lines back and forth, Estragon often repeats himself at the end of a string of lines. This occurs for the first time in this exchange: "Estragon: The circus. Vladimir: The music-hall. Estragon: The circus." This same trope will recur several times in a row at the beginning of the second act, always with Estragon repeating himself.
We see here that Vladimir supports Estragon after Estragon is kicked by Lucky: when he cries that he cannot walk, Vladimir offers to carry him, if necessary. This illustrates Vladimir's attempt to protect and take care of Estragon.
Vladimir is often very quick to change his mind. When he learns of Lucky's long term of service to Pozzo, he becomes angry with Pozzo for mistreating his servant. However, when Pozzo gets upset and says that he cannot bear it any longer, Vladimir quickly transfers his anger to Lucky, whom he reproaches for mistreating his master after so many years. This illustrates how Vladimir's opinion can be easily swayed by a change in circumstances.
In this section we see the first suggestions that Vladimir and Estragon might represent all of humanity. When Pozzo first enters, he notes that Vladimir and Estragon are of the same species as he is, "made in God's image." Later, when Pozzo asks Estragon what his name is, he replies "Adam." This comparison of Estragon to Adam, the first man, suggests that he may represent all of mankind; and this link between Estragon and Adam also relates to the idea of Godot as God.
Pozzo's inquiry about how Vladimir and Estragon found him suggests that Pozzo is giving a performance. This notion is reinforced when he has Lucky perform for them. It seems that Pozzo and Lucky appear primarily to entertain Vladimir and Estragon--after Pozzo and Luck leave, the other two men comment that their presence helped the time pass more rapidly.
Pozzo's failure to depart anticipates the way that Vladimir and Estragon remain waiting at the end of each of the acts, after saying they will depart. However, even after saying, "I don't seem to be able to depart," Pozzo does actually manage to leave. Pozzo moves on while Vladimir and Estragon remain fixed even as the curtain falls at the end of each act.

Act I: Pozzo and Lucky's Exit to Conclusion

This section begins with the most commonly repeated dialogue in the play, in which Estragon wants to go and Vladimir tells him that they are waiting for Godot. This section provides evidence for a religious reading of the play as Estragon compares himself to Christ when he decides to go barefoot. When Vladimir tells him not to compare himself to Christ, Estragon responds that "all my life I've compared myself to him."
Vladimir's statement that he pretended not to recognize Pozzo and Lucky suggests that he has met them before. This indicates that the actions presented in the first act of the play may have happened before, calling attention to events that occur outside the frame of the play. The same thing occurs when Vladimir asks the boy if he came yesterday, revealing that they were waiting yesterday with the same result. This suggests that the same events have been going on for some time; the two acts of the play are merely two instances in a long pattern of ceaselessly repeating events.
The end of Act I establishes Vladimir and Estragon's hopelessness. Even when they both agree to go, and Vladimir says "Yes, let's go," the two men do not move. Even their resolution to go is not strong enough to produce action. This inability to act renders Vladimir and Estragon unable to determine their own fates. Instead of acting, they can only wait for someone or something to act upon them.

Act II: Introduction & Pozzo and Lucky's Entrance

Vladimir's song about the dog who stole a crust of bread repeats itself perpetually. The two verses follow each other in succession so that it can be sung forever, although here Vladimir only sings each verse twice. This song is a representation of the repetitive nature of the play as a whole and of Vladimir and Estragon's circular lives. Like the verses of the song, the events of their lives follow one after another, again and again, with no apparent beginning or end.
The hat switching incident is another illustration of the endless, often mindless, repetition that seems to characterize the play. Like Vladimir's song at the beginning of Act II, the hat switching could go on perpetually and only stops when Vladimir decides arbitrarily to put an end to it.
Vladimir and Estragon's discussion about the noise made by "all the dead voices" brings back the theme of Estragon repeating himself to end a string of conversation. Three times in a row, Estragon repeats his phrase, with silence following each repetition. Estragon's repetition of the phrases "like leaves" and "they rustle" emphasizes these phrases, especially since Estragon comes back to "like leaves" in the third part of their discussion.
In this section we see again Vladimir's desire to protect Estragon. He believes that the primary reason Estragon returns to him every day, despite his declarations that he is happier alone, is that he needs Vladimir to help him defend himself. Whether or not Vladimir actually does protect Estragon, Vladimir clearly feels that this duty and responsibility define their relationship.
Estragon's statement that he will go and get a carrot, followed by the stage directions "he does not move," recalls their immobility in Act I's conclusion, and is another illustration of the way that the characters do not act on their words or intentions. Vladimir recognizes this problem after he decides that they should try on the boots; he says impatiently, "let us persevere in what we have resolved, before we forget." Vladimir's clear awareness of his own problem makes his inability to solve it--to act and to move--seem even more frustrating and unfathomable.

Act II: Pozzo and Lucky Scene

Here again Vladimir seems to recognize the problem of inaction when he decides that they should help Pozzo. He becomes suddenly vehement and shouts, "Let us not waste our time in idle discourse! Let us do something, while we have the chance!" This call to action seems like an urgent rally against the trend of inaction he and Estragon have been following throughout the play; however, Vladimir still takes plenty of time to begin to help Pozzo to his feet. This suggests that, even with good intentions and resolution, the habit of inaction cannot be broken immediately.

In this speech Vladimir also declares that at this point, "all mankind is us, whether we like it or not." This continues the theme of Vladimir and Estragon's representation of mankind as a whole and shows that Vladimir is himself aware of this comparison. Estragon also illustrates the parallel between the two men and the rest of humanity when he tells Vladimir that "billions" of people can also claim that they have kept their appointment. In this case Vladimir attempts to distinguish them from the rest of mankind, but Estragon insists that they are actually the same.
Another biblical allusion is presented here through the comparison of Pozzo and Lucky to Cain and Abel. However, when Pozzo responds to the names Cain and Abel, Estragon decides that "he's all humanity." This suggestion indicates once more that the characters in the play represent the human race as a whole.
Vladimir's need of Estragon's help in order to get up is somewhat of a role reversal. For a brief exchange, Estragon holds the power in the relationship as Vladimir calls to him for help. However, when Estragon does finally stretch out his hand to help Vladimir up, he only falls himself. This seems to indicate that Estragon does not belong in this position of power and responsibility and cannot act to fulfill it.

Act II: Pozzo and Lucky's Exit to Conclusion

By this point in the play, the dialogue about waiting for Godot has been repeated so many times that even Estragon knows it. Every time he asked Vladimir to go previously, they went through the entire dialogue about why they could not go. However, this time, Estragon goes through a miniature version of this dialogue by himself: "Let's go. We can't. Ah!" It seems that the numerous repetitions of this dialogue have finally impressed its hopeless resolution upon Estragon's mind. Similarly, by the time the boy arrives in Act II, Vladimir already knows what he will say, and the boy does not have to tell him anything. This suggests that this dialogue has occurred many times before and furthers the indication that the play is just a representative sample of the larger circle that defines Vladimir and Estragon's lives.
The play's conclusion echoes the end of Act I. Even the stage directions reflect this similarity: after boy's exit and the moonrise, the stage directions read, "as in Act I, Vladimir stands motionless and bowed." While a live audience would not read these directions, they serve to emphasize the parallel between the two acts for readers and for actors performing the play. The repetition of the final two lines from the previous act at the play's conclusion shows the continued importance of repetition and parallelism in Waiting for Godot. However, the characters have switched lines from the previous act, suggesting that ultimately, despite their differences, Vladimir and Estragon are really interchangeable after all.

Study Questions

1. What do you think is the most effective way that Beckett presents repetition in Waiting for Godot? If the play is meant as a representative sample of what happens every night in the lives of Vladimir and Estragon, why does Beckett choose to present two acts instead of three, or one?

Answer:
The presentation of essentially the same action twice in the two acts is the most important form of repetition in the play. More than one act is necessary to show the repetition of actions in the play, but this does not explain why Beckett chooses to use two acts instead of more than two. The choice of two acts may be somehow related to the use of pairs of characters, emphasizing the importance of characters and actions that occur in twos.

2. Describe the relationship between Vladimir and Estragon. Why do you think they stay together, despite their frequent suggestions of parting?

Answer:
The relationship between Vladimir (Didi) and Estragon (Gogo) are
a) Interdependent: they are waiting for Godot and suffer "humanity" together.
b) Human like: Estragon (Gogo) represents human��s body because he always wants to eat and sleep; Vladimir (Didi) represents human��s mind because he is rational.
c) Savior- survivor: Vladimir saved Estragon from Rhone fifty years ago.
d) teacher/student, leader/follower, boss/servant, head (mind)/body relationship
e) Interchangeable: they always exchange/switch lines (and hat). They are like the same person.
Some critics have suggested that Vladimir and Estragon remain together because of their complementary personalities, arguing that each fulfills the qualities that the other lacks, rendering them dependent on each other. Think about what evidence there is in the play for this type of interpretation.

3. The two most important sets of characters in the play occur in pairs. Does this emphasis on pairs create some significance for the boy, who appears alone? Vladimir and the boy discuss his brother; could this brother be the boy's pair? Perhaps the most important "character" in the play, Godot, is also a single character rather than a pair. Does this distinguish him from Vladimir and Estragon, Pozzo and Lucky? Does Beckett seem to prefer single characters or pairs?

Answer:
To be a pair is very important in this play, for they can remind each other��s existence. For example, Gogo in this play cannot remember what he did yesterday. He depends on Didi, who owns better memory, to tell him everything about the past. Although he can remember what has happened, Didi depends on Gogo to remind him what they have done together. Without each other they will live in uncertainty and suspicion, because no one actually remembers them. Therefore, they serve to make sure each other��s identity. We can also say that Godot and the boy may be a pair to identify each other��s existence. In the beginning of the play, we are not sure if there is really a guy named Godot, for he never appears in the play. Not until the boy appears as a servant of Godot informing Gogo and Didi that Godot will not come��today�� but will surely come ��the next day�� do we start to believe Godot��s existence. And, it is Godot��s existence that shows the importance of the boy. In the way, they should be
an interdependent pair to prove each other��s existence.

4. How does the relationship between Vladimir and Estragon compare with the relationship between Pozzo and Lucky? What is the effect created by the contrast between these two pairs of characters? Is it significant that the characters appear in pairs, rather than alone?

5. Do you think the play warrants a religious reading? Can Godot be considered a Christ figure or simply a religious figure? If so, what is implied by his failure to appear? What about Estragon's attempts to equate himself with Christ? Consider also the many biblical allusions throughout the play, such as the mention of Cain and Abel and the discussion of the story of the two thieves.

6. Though it seems as if nothing happens in the play, actions actually play a very important role in Waiting for Godot. The stage directions of the play constitute nearly half of the text, suggesting that the actions, expressions, and emotions of the actors are as important as the dialogue. Examine the significance of the stage directions of one particular scene; for example, why is Estragon always struggling with his boot? What is the significance of Pozzo's vaporizer spray? What is the point of the scene in which Vladimir and Estragon exchange hats eight times?

Answer:
The function of Pozzo's constant action of spraying his vaporizer has something to do with the identity of his class. Pozzo obviously represents a person in higher status of the hierarchical structure of the human society, and it is required for people like him to keep himself flawless. Thus the constant spray of the vaporizer means that Pozzo is subconsciously aware that his mouth cannot smell bad, hence he keeps spraying the vaporizer. Also it represents a sense of diffidence, like many others in the society with similar bad habits, because spraying at the rate of Pozzo is definitely too much, this overreaction must come from the fact that he is not sure of himself. That Estragon (Gogo) always wants to eat and sleep and always struggles with his boot may suggest humans try to earn a living and struggle for their life. The hat switching incident is another illustration of the endless, often mindless, repetition that seems to characterize the play. Like Vladimir's song at the beginning of Act II, the hat switching could go on perpetually and only stops when Vladimir decides arbitrarily to put an end to it.

7. Beckett called his play a "tragicomedy." Do you agree with this classification? If not, how would you classify the play? Do you think the play contains more elements of tragedy or comedy?

Answer:
The reason why this play is classified as a ��tragicomedy�� is because the ideas of tragedy are conveyed in the form of comedy and then sent forward to the audience.
So exactly what is tragic? For example, the desire of wanting to find a meaning for human existence and to be completely independent in the society; however, it is impossible for Estragon and Vladimir to separate from each other, nor to find a meaningful existence.
Another is that they know they can��t live apart. And in order to end this kind of misery, they know what exactly they have to do. But, they do not have enough courage to end their miserable lives. This is another example of their tragedy.
Beckett uses a kind of humorous way to present this insignificant life that Gogo and Didi live, their inability, their immobility, and the way that the characters do not act on their words or intentions on stage. In other words, using the comedy to tell the audience the helpless situations and life condition Estragon/Vladimir and Pozzo/Lucky have in the play.
In conclusion, classifying it under the genre of ��tragicomedy�� is quite adequate. Of course, there is other point of views to look at the play, which might lead to other understandings. Therefore, there is no definite answer to this question, nor can we find a general agreement on the issue. You might have your own viewpoint.

8. What is memory's role in the play? Why do so many of the characters' memories seem to be erased each day? Vladimir seems to be the only character who remembers things from one day to the next. What is the purpose of having one character remember what all of the others forget?

Answer:
A. It is strange that they remember the things far back in the past but not recent occurrence like what happened yesterday. But every yesterday constitutes the past. Through this absurdity the play expresses the futility of trying to prove that the past or even a person himself ever exists. Time is the illusion of past experience. This is the reason why their memories seem to be erased every day. The play attempts to show the meaninglessness of human existence. All is an illusion.
B. Memory gives the two protagonists hope that Godot will come. It seems the only things they remember is the past, and the fact that Godot keeps them waiting. Whoever Godot is, obviously Gogo and Didi have been waiting for him for many days (or a long time) before the curtain rises because they know right away as the messenger boy approaches them that Godot would not be there.
C. The purpose of having one sole character remembering and the rest forgetting the past is to show the helplessness and incompetence of human beings in the world. Although Didi tries with all his might to prove they were there yesterday, nobody believes in him. All his efforts turn into futile action that leads to nothing. He is questioned even by himself when nobody seems to think they existed yesterday. The play implies: there is no way to prove you exist, and even if you believe so, there is possibility that you are wrong.

9. What is the overall tone of the play? Is the reader left with a feeling of resignation that Godot will never come, and Vladimir and Estragon will continue to wait in vain, or is there some hope created? Do the changes in Pozzo and Lucky between the first and second acts contribute to an overall feeling of hopelessness? What about the changes in the tree? The coming of spring often suggests hope for the future; is this the case here?

Answer:
The overall tone of the play is mixed with restlessness, helplessness, and nihility. The characters in the play seem to have nothing to do with the situation they are in. Both pairs (Vladimir & Estragon and Poaao & Lucky) want to get rid of each other, but they fail to do so. As readers, we are left a feeling that there won��t be a day that Godot will show up to meet Gogo and Didi because the two Acts in the play apparently appear to be a part of their endless repetition. Thus, even if the Beckett continues the play with Act III, Act IV, the outcome will be the same. Though there��s no definite answer to ��if Godot will appear or not,�� whenever the messenger boy brings the message to Gogo and Didi, there��s the hope for them, that is, Godot will show up TOMORROW. As to the changes in Pozzo and Lucky between the first and second act, they do contribute to a feeling of hopelessness to the play and the readers at the same time. And the hopelessness lies in Pozzo��s decadence. Pozzo��s losing his sight symbolizes the degradation of his position. Before Pozzo loses his sight, he is the one who takes control of and abuses Lucky. The situation reverses afterwards because Pozzo has to rely on Lucky��s guidance with a rope. And the chance takes place only in one day��s time. Finally, that the tree grows few leaves in the second act might suggest hope for their future, and it might be merely a reference for the change of time.