Why Godot?

There have been many theories of why Samuel Beckett chose the name “Godot” in Waiting for Godot. Personally, I find the idea that the first three letters represent the character the most intriguing: God. According to the absurdist philosophy, one of the ways humans attempt to give the world meaning is through religion. Godot does seem to share many aspects of his being with God. Godot never takes a physical form in the play. Audiences never see him, yet everyone is completely convinced that he must exist because Vladimir and Estragon continually speak of his coming. Godot has messengers who he sends to speak to Vladimir and Estragon, instead of appearing himself. Vladimir and Estragon seem to have a great respect for Godot and at time take up a reverent tone when speaking of him. The play addresses all seven of the ways in which humans attempt to tackle the meaning of the universe, but religion seems to be emphasized. Maybe Beckett felt the need to incorporate so many references to the Bible and God because religion is such a large part of society and culture. It seems to be the most common way that people find meaning in life. I would like to be clear and state that Samuel Beckett is just one man and his philosophies are simply his ideas and opinions, not fact. However, in the literary sense, the ambiguous name of “Godot” was rather ingenious. Maybe Beckett actually had not intention of Godot representing God but rather wanted people to automatically arrive at that conclusion in order to point out society’s obsession with a higher being. The name “Godot” allows readers to attach whatever meaning they want to the name.

What's so Funny?

Samuel Beckett’s Waiting for Godot, is an entertaining and comedic play with perhaps one of the most depressing themes audiences will come across. Audiences laugh at the silly antics of Vladimir and Estragon, but the end of the play leaves one questioning the world and universe around them. “A life without meaning is not worth living.” “Do more than just exist.” “Find your purpose.” These phrases are seen everywhere, from posters to Facebook posts.  Some people believe in them so wholeheartedly they have them permanently branded on their bodies in ink. Waiting for Godot seems to go against all these clichés. In fact, the whole play is written based on the absurdism principles that say the universe has no meaning or purpose. So why do so many people find the play funny? Well the play falls perfectly into the category of tragicomedy. Estragon and Vladimir are living a life with one sole purpose: waiting for Godot. Audiences never meet the mysterious man because he never shows up. While audiences are chuckling at, for lack of a better word, the absurdity of Estragon and Vladimir, the two main characters are also calmly contemplating hanging themselves just for something to do. This odd juxtaposition between the comedic and the dark seems to mirror life. The world is filled with tragedy, and yet many people find a way to smile and enjoy themselves in every day life. Why? It’s a distraction. Maybe audiences find comedy in the play because it allows them to avoid the real, somewhat scary, meaning behind the performance. Just as perhaps one laughs at the world in order to avoid accepting the hard to accept and tragic. Many use comedy as deflection and Beckett capitalizes on that. The laugher of the audience seems to emphasize the whole point of the play. Humans tend to avoid what they cannot understand. According to Beckett the world has no meaning, and most people refuse to accept that.

Posthumous Publishing

Whether or not to publish the private works of an author that has passed is a complex question. It calls morals into question and lines become hazy and vague. One always wants to respect the wishes of a friend or family member after their passing, but sometimes going against that wish can be for the betterment of society. Take The Diary of Young Girl by Anne Frank. I can confidently say that no teenage girl wants her private diary to be published. Why? Because it is embarrassing. However, does that embarrassment cease to exist when a human’s soul leaves this earth? Anne Frank’s work has had a monumental impact globally. Many hide their work from the world because it is “private” which can also been interpreted as the author being scared. Franz Kafka suffered from self doubt most likely derived from his father’s verbal abuse. He wanted all of his manuscripts to be destroyed after his death, but his friend Max Brod decided to go against his wishes and publish his works. While a betrayal, this gave the literary world great works that are still studied today, nearly one hundred years later. Personally, I believe that going against a dying wish can be justified, but not always. Telling a family member that a loved one secretly despised them after their passing or sharing a personal secret that will only cause harm is unnecessary, but sharing a work that will benefit others seems appropriate. Yes, the parallels between Kafka’s own life and the characters in his works, especially Metamorphosis, are clear and not very flattering regarding his parents, but the meanings and lessons found in the works outweigh the negative impact on his family’s feelings. If anything, seeing the torment that a father imposes on his son in a fictional character may have caused Kafka’s father to reevaluate his own actions. 

Gregor a Sacrifice?

Franz Kafka’s Metamorphosis was originally written in German. Over the past hundred years, the novella has been translated to multiple languages. While purposefully written with vague language concerning the actual creature that Gregor is transformed into, in translations he frequently is described and illustrated as a cockroach or beetle. The actual German word used in reference to Gregor loosely translates to an animal unfit for sacrifice. The description could be seen as ironic as Gregor dies at the end of the story. However, for there to actually be irony Gregor’s death would actually have to be a sacrifice rather than just a consequence of being an insect. An example of Kafka’s admiration for existentialism, Gregor is transformed because his complete and utter lack of meaning in his own life. Looking at Gregor as a sacrifice requires looking at the meaning of his parents’ and sister’s lives. Gregor is what keeps the family functioning. He is the sole breadwinner of the family. Gregor’s transformation and eventual death was a wake up call for the family. They were forced to start working instead of just lounging around all day. By the end of the novella, the parents are happy and financially secure and it appears as if Grete is now “marriageable.” Ignoring the fact that Gregor is dead, it appears that the story has a happy ending. So is Gregor a sacrifice? Was his death required for the family to get back on its feet and happy again? While rather dark and twisted, Gregor does seem to go against his description as not worthy of sacrifice. But then again, Gregor could simply be a commentary on the human condition – we live a hard and meaningless life and then we die unsatisfied.