Customer Reviews: Read 157 more reviews...
 "Nothing happens, twice". January 12, 2005
Belén (Buenos Aires, Argentina)
84 out of 91 found this review helpful
"Nothing happens, nobody comes, nobody goes, it's awful!". That phrase, said by one of the main characters of "Waiting for Godot", somehow sums up the whole plot of this short tragicomedy in two acts. Strange??. You can bet on that!!!. So much that a well-known Irish critic said of it "nothing happens, twice".
The play starts with two men, Vladimir and Estragon, sitting on a lonely road. They are both waiting for Godot. They don't know why they are waiting for him, but they think that his arrival will change things for the better. The problem is that he doesn't come, although a kid does so and says Godot will eventually arrive. Pozzo and his servant Lucky, two other characters that pass by while our protagonists are waiting for Godot, add another bizarre touch to an already surreal story, in which nothing seems to happen and discussions between the characters don't make much sense.
However, maybe that is exactly the point that Samuel Beckett (1906-1989) wanted to make. He was one of the most accomplished exponents of the "Theatre of the Absurd", that wanted to highlight the lack of purpose and meaning in an universe without God. Does Godot, the person that Vladimir and Estragon endlessly wait, symbolize God?. According to an irascible Beckett, when hard-pressed to answer that question, "If I knew who Godot was, I would have said so in the play." So, we don't know. The result is a highly unusual play that poses many questions, but doesn't answer them.
Ripe with symbolism, "Waiting for Godot" is a play more or less open to different interpretations. Why more or less open?. Well, because in order to have an interpretation of your own, you have to finish the play, and that is something that not all readers can do. "Waiting for Godot" is neither too long nor too difficult, but it shows a lack of action and purpose in the characters that is likely to annoy many before they reach the final pages, leading them to abandon the book in a hurry. That is specially true if the reader is a student who thinks he is being barbarously tortured by a hateful teacher who told him to write a paper on "Waiting for Godot" :)
My advice, for what it is worth, is that you should persist in reading it. If it puts you to sleep, try reading it aloud with some friends, and discuss with them the implications of what happens with the characters. This play might not be thoroughly engaging, but it changed theatre and the possibilities opened before it forever. In a way, it provoked a blood-less revolution, and because of that it deserves at least a bit of our attention.
Belen Alcat
 A question to the potential reader: August 14, 2000
Felix Matathias (Manhattan, NY, USA)
43 out of 61 found this review helpful
What is your perception of the VOID ? The vacuum ? If you ever had the chance to feel the absolute void, the true nothingness, would you consider it to be beautifull ? Would you consider it to be God ? Or would you be scared and turn away ? To get a feeling of what other people felt just read the previous reviews. Some of them thought it was majestic, some of them thought it was God and some of them fled away, scared, and because they got scared they thought that it was something ugly. Since we do not have the chance to perceive the real void because the natural law forbids it, the closest thing available is Waiting for Godot. The words are misleading. There should be no words, but Becket had no other choice in the material world that we live. So if you are curious to see in what category you belong just read it. As for me, I thought it was beautifull. One of the most beautifull things I have ever experienced....
 Sleepy little classic December 17, 2006
Stratiotes Doxha Theon (Richmond, Missouri)
35 out of 42 found this review helpful
This classic of the absurd tragicomedy must be given its due respect though I have to admit, I found it a bit of a sleep-inducer. The story follows a conversation about a character wasting his time awaiting the arrival of his friend. The friend, it seems, is never going to arrive and so the plot is really a roller-coaster ride of emotions from excited anticipation to boredom to utter hopelessness and dispair. But, sadly, its an anti-climactic end with nothing - which is, in essence, the message of the play. Read it for it's historical and social significance but do not expect more than what it can give. Risking negative votes on my review I have to add, at least it is short and Beckett does not make the mistake of attempting to belabor a very tired point.
The Most Important Play of the 20th Century September 22, 1999
Michael S. Kohler (Districto Federale de Washington)
32 out of 41 found this review helpful
Ah... Waiting For Godot. Where do I even start?This play, one of the finest plays by the most important playwright to write in English (I know he originally wrote it in French) since Shakespeare (Feel free to argue with me) finds a outlet and a means to express the longings and emptiness of modern man. For all those who don't like it, get a friend and read it out loud together. That might change your mind. To all the reviews which seem to find that the whole "point" of the play can be found in the name Godot (which as a mixture of English and French could mean "Little God"), I think you are simplifying the play to a great extreme. One of my favorite quotes by Beckett on this subject was that if he had known who Godot was, he wouldn't have had to write the play. Frankly, all of you trying to find "meaning" or solution to the play are looking in the wrong places. Which isn't to say there isn't a lot there. Juggle it all round in your head, but don't ever really grab on to something as the key: you're probably wrong. To the review who complained that Beckett didn't adequately give the time period or location for his play, I argue that he did: "A country road. A tree. Evening." That is all you need, and according to the man himself, all that should be on stage, scenery-wise. A Civil War play? You must be joking. But anyway, to summarize, Beckett finished what Hemingway began: distilling the language of literature into a tangible, true format with which we can truly explore the nature of human existence. Centuries from now they will remember Hemingway, Joyce, and Beckett when they talk about 20th century literature. So there.
A Lot About Nothing At All January 20, 2006
Shane M. Snyder (Chrono Synclastically Infundibulated)
32 out of 36 found this review helpful
Some think Waiting for Godot is an argument for existentialism. Others believe it is about man's eternal struggle for the answer to the ultimate question. Neither seem correct.
In short, this is a play for those who prefer to strip everything down to the most basic form of language, to strip life down to a mere game of waiting. That is, in essence, what this is all about. We have two characters, Vladimir and Estragon, who both wait for a man who may or may not ever show up. They don't know why. They don't know exactly when he will be there. Still they wait, eternally, by the tree, by wherever they think he said he would show.
This isn't an absurdist play, although it has been labeled as such. Absurdism, though, seems such an insulting way of labeling such a masterpiece. We oftentimes go thorugh our readings with the idea that everything has to be complex, that there has to be a theme placed deep within a convoluted story, but with Waiting for Godot, we have a simple theme: waiting.
The two characters symbolize nothing. They are, quite simply, not waiting to be analyzed. They become, in effect, victims of Samuel Beckett's own game: they are his quotation, and he only says what needed to be said at the time, and so he wrote it, whether people would catch on or not, whether they would label it absurdism or not.
If you were to take every line of this play and utter it aloud, very slowly, word by word like a robot in a very monotone fashion, you would probably capture the idea. If it's any indication, he wrote everything in French first--his second language--and then translated it in to English, just so it can be simple. I don't assume, of course, that this work should be cherished simply because it's an exercise in simplicity. But I submit that it should be cherished because it's a genuine, themeless--somehow--masterpiece about two people waiting for the most unimportant, unknown thing that may or may not ever come. It is frequently hilarious and constantly frivolous, but somehow, it manages to charm. It is like one of those songs that you can listen to over and over again, and it has no lyrics, and no meaning--as far as you know--but it still makes you feel good under glaring adversity.
|
