You spin me right round, baby
Right round like a record, baby
Right round round round

Still absurd. Quite ridiculous. Occasionally philosophical. However, since its completion, the comedy of Waiting for Godot has become rather commonplace. The humor, which at times could be likened to that of the Three Stooges, might even make one think this play is behind the times. I merely say it could be said, not that I firmly believe it is so.

Does Waiting for Godot truly deserve all the attention it has garnered? After all, it seems to simultaneously state the meaning of life while asserting that life is meaningless, which is a rather significant proclamation. From the mouths of the characters Vladimir and Estragon, Beckett implies that nothing in life truly matters. Yet, the characters hold contempt for suicide, which is the ultimate matter of life. Their subsequent neglect to take this step might suggest that they believe there is value in life. Or perhaps they are simply too lazy to perform this deed that would release them from having to do anything ever again.

Ah, but look at me, foolishly attempting to make sense of it all when, if anything is clear, that is surely not what Beckett intended. Instead, let me explain why this play received no better than a middling rating from me. It has an overabundance of Falstaffs. When everyone is a comedian, real conversation devolves into a comedian's lingua franca, and much of the humor's original basis for being funny is lost. In other words, we laugh at the absurdity of life, but if life is constantly absurd, the humor dissipates. In Waiting for Godot, the humor dissipated to such an extent for me that it failed to leave a lasting impact. There, I've said it.

I read this book while hang-gliding over the beautiful coast of Liechtenstein. It was an extremely challenging task to grip the jacket of the book. The reason was twofold. Firstly, I was airborne, which made it physically difficult to hold onto anything firmly. Secondly, the night before, I was in Moscow having vodka and gasoline with Luis San Baptista Rodolfo Sr., a former foot soldier for the Revolutionary FALN. My head was pounding like a drum.

I told Luis over a rather unusual dinner of red cabbage over braised Skeletor Dolls that I had never seen the last episode of Family Ties. Instantly, he grew furious and cried out, "Matushka! Matushka! My cauliflower is on fire!" Then he thrust a copy of "Waiting for Godot" into my pocket and whispered into my big toe, "Listen, my friend, I only have a credit card, so I put on my visa and you give me cash, no?"

I immediately understood Luis' implicit instructions. I realized that the only proper way to read Beckett truly, to feel the power of his words, is to do so while manning non-mechanical aircraft.

At first, I found Beckett's dramatic universe too glib, even watery, like a Burmese jungle cat. The dialogue seemed too reliant upon the use of words. I thought the use of characters instead of sandwiches or tuxedos was trite and derivative. However, I also found the verdant pastures of Liechtenstein simply enchanting from an aerial point of view. Several times, I found myself questioning my decision to question my decision to use McDonald's wrappers from the Basque Region for the material of my hang-glider's wings. But then I realized, that's the point: having no discernible narrative thru-line is STILL a narrative thru-line all the same. Beckett's brilliance touched me at last. (But without permission, so I'm suing him in the Hague.)

So, I'm giving this a 5. Not a strong five. But not a weak five either. It's the sort of 5 that actively worked out for the high school rugby team, but then spent college taking it easy, drinking Irish Car Bombs, and now, years later plays Ultimate Frisbee on the weekends and sometimes runs in Central Park in the evenings, if not doing Bikram Yoga in Soho.

Since I started reading the book, I was looking for a concept to understand, and the main problem was this.

Because the basis and foundation of Godot's play is undoubtedly, meaningless, or rather, it is difficult to understand the things that we mostly see, experience and engage in in our lives.

Generally, a deep understanding of the things that we have been facing for a long time is harder than the things that are new to us. For example, waiting for something, someone or an event that we are not sure about, the pain of existence, the routines and repetitions of our lives.

From the translator's afterword:

- Man cannot be at ease with anything, he cannot rely on anything, he cannot have faith in anything, he cannot put his neck on anything.

P.S: If the part of the eye-catching translation of Mr. Rastgar had not been there, I would not have achieved a correct understanding. It was really necessary and powerful.

Waiting for Godot is an extremely powerful allegory that delves deep into the essence of human life and religion. It presents a profound truth that we often find ourselves spending a significant portion of our time waiting. We wait for various things, perhaps for opportunities, for someone to come into our lives, or for a resolution to our problems. And then, before we know it, one day we die. Waiting can be an incredibly boring and tiresome experience. However, it is often much easier and safer to wait than to take action.

One of the thieves was saved. It's a reasonable percentage.

This quote makes us question whether we are all like those thieves, waiting for salvation. Are we constantly hoping that someone or something will come along and save us from our mundane and often insignificant problems? Or do we wait for that one person who would have the power to resolve all our issues and make our lives complete?

Waiting can become a trap, a cycle that we find difficult to break free from. But perhaps it is also in the act of waiting that we learn patience, perseverance, and the ability to endure. It is a complex and thought-provoking concept that forces us to examine our own lives and the choices we make.

Review revived again to mark the three month anniversary of the Top Lists being frozen.

As we all know, the votes that we strive for, endure the pain of slowly crawling across barbed wire to win, are the sole means by which we reviewers can ascertain that we are still alive. We yearn for the boost that only the weekly Top Lists can provide. And indeed, if one were being extremely unkind, they could describe the inexplicable absence of up-to-date Top Reviewer and Best Review Lists as a "first world problem." However, reviewers are people too. Let Samuel Beckett further elucidate.

ESTRAGON: Stuff this for a game of soldiers. Let's go.

VLADIMIR: We can't go.

ESTRAGON: Why not?

VLADIMIR: We're waiting for the Top Lists to be displayed correctly, remember?

ESTRAGON: Oh those.

VLADIMIR: Yes, those. Without the Top Lists, we are lost in a world of chaos, not knowing who is at the top and who is at the bottom. Which review is the best? Which one managed to make it in the frenzied salmon-dash up the Goodreads river of reviews to spawn in the sun?

ESTRAGON: You're very poetical tonight. Did you eat something that disagreed with you?

VLADIMIR: We must have the votes correctly tallied. It says so in the Bible.

ESTRAGON: But the vote counter is broken.

VLADIMIR: (sighs. Gives up trying to unlace his boot.) Yes, the vote counter is broken.

ESTRAGON: It's a sign.

VLADIMIR: It is a sign. But we have to wait.

ESTRAGON: What for?

VLADIMIR: For the vote counter to be fixed. We must.

ESTRAGON: I could go, you could wait. I think I left something in the oven.

VLADIMIR: You'll be back. Us sort, we have to wait.

ESTRAGON: For the vote counter to be fixed.

VLADIMIR: Yes. But we know it never will be fixed.

ESTRAGON: Yes. But we have to wait even so.

VLADIMIR: We should ask Rivka.

RIVKA (appearing from a cloud): There is a bug. We have identified it. It will be fixed. But not yet.

ESTRAGON: See? I told you. It's hopeless.

VLADIMIR: No, not hopeless. But there is no hope.

He has no shame if he hasn't yet reached military service age...and is a graduated master's degree holder who has been expelled!!!...Well...barking twice is not something to be proud of...in the spirit of the military...being expelled from the university also requires raising the hat of respect...the heel of the row along with silence...but he is really ashamed that he hasn't yet read the Quran until now...Shame, shame, and thousands of shames on me.!!!

And now on the 27th of Dhu al-Hijjah 1440, I became one of the believers.

  ESTRAGON: I tell you I wasn't doing anything.
VLADIMIR: Perhaps you weren't. But it's the way of doing it that counts, the way of doing it, if you want to go on living.

I really don't know how I would have reviewed this work if the Charleston church shooting hadn't happened. For those not in the know with a US-centric view, a white man drove for two hours to reach one of the oldest black churches in the country. He attended the prayer among the crowd for a while and then opened fire on the congregation, killing nine people. A five-year-old girl survived by playing dead. The white man was taken into custody without being killed on the spot, and news outlets that aren't ignoring the story are calling it a hate crime. One irony is, what was the point of inventing the word "terrorism" if popular common sense selectively uses it. Another is the fact that I'm even trying to pick apart the usual inconsistencies that allow the world to sleep soundly on the suffering of others. The things the powerful do. I'm angry because I haven't been forced into fear.

  VLADIMIR: Silence!
All listen, bent double.
ESTRAGON: I hear something.
POZZO: Where?
VLADIMIR: It's the heart.
POZZO: (disappointed). Damnation!

As an atheist, I'm not going to discuss the deity-related stuff. I'm more interested in authority, random violence, and how the average person reacts to horror, both in the surrounding environment and in intimate relationships. Here, we have two homeless men who regularly threaten to kill themselves, waiting for something higher, watching the antics of a higher (?) with a lower (?), troubled by biological matters, hazy about the truths of the past, and abandoned by the mores of reality. There is talk of exile, punishment for being poor, the anticipation of hanging with the appearance of another, a future that can't be dealt with beyond day by day, and so on. There is the distraction of "cripple" due to the loss of the senses. There is the threat of succumbing to that age-old accepted cripple, the only one of its kind: sadism, realpolitik, finding the value of a human being lacking.

  VLADIMIR: Let us not waste our time in idle discourse! (Pause. Vehemently.)Let us do something, while we have the chance! It is not every day that we are needed. Not indeed that we personally are needed. Others would meet the case equally well, if not better. To all mankind they were addressed, those cries for help still ringing in our ears! But at this place, in this moment of time, all mankind is us, whether we like it or not. Let us make the most of it, before it is too late! Let us represent worthily for once the foul brood to which a cruel fate consigned us! What do you say?

The times have changed. The lines of power proclaimed by history are deeply ingrained through the erasure of history, the trading of homicide, and the liminal spaces of hired hands and mental illness. The poor, the enslaved, the abused. For the post-WWII era, I have to wonder how many people were involved in the Vichy Government, the concentration camps, and the refusal of refugees worldwide. Or we could simplify it and talk about authority, random violence, gaslighting, the impulse to hurt, the impulse to reach out, and the impulse to risk punishment for the sake of movement or forgo movement for the sake of punishment.

  VLADIMIR: Was I sleeping, while the others suffered? Am I sleeping now? To-morrow, when I wake, or think I do, what shall I say of to-day?

There's humor in this. That's the hard part. The worst part is that, at its core, this is about power. How often do Vladimir and Estragon walk hand in hand in the face of it? How often do we?

Hepimiz deli doğarız. Bazılarımız öyle kalır. This statement holds a certain truth. We are all born with a kind of wildness and unrestrained nature within us. As we grow up, some people manage to tame this inner wildness and conform to the norms and expectations of society. They learn to control their impulses and behave in a more civilized and acceptable way.

However, there are also those who choose to keep that wild side alive. They embrace their uniqueness and refuse to be confined by the limitations imposed by others. They may follow their own path, even if it means going against the mainstream. These people often bring a sense of excitement and innovation to the world.

In conclusion, whether we remain "crazy" or not is a personal choice. Both paths have their own merits and drawbacks. What matters is that we stay true to ourselves and follow our hearts, no matter what.

ACT I



In this first act, we are introduced to a captivating scene. There is an image of a person with a certain charm, as depicted by the first picture. The width of the image is 180 pixels and the height is 32 pixels. It gives a sense of mystery and allure.



Then, another image appears, which seems to add to the atmosphere. It is a gif that shows some kind of movement or action.



ACT II



The second act begins with the same initial image, perhaps indicating a continuation or a return to a familiar theme.



After that, a different gif is presented. This one might suggest a new development or a change in the story.



Overall, these acts seem to be setting the stage for an exciting and engaging narrative, with the images playing an important role in creating the mood and advancing the story.

“Nothing happens. Nobody comes, nobody goes. It's awful.”

God and Shoes

'Waiting for Godot' is a remarkable work of art that presents life in its most raw and fundamental form. It has been stripped down to its very essence, allowing for a plethora of interpretations. One of the most common interpretations is that it is an allegory of Christianity. The two lead characters can be seen as representing different schools of Christianity, with Lucky symbolizing Christ, Pozzo as a corrupted form of religion, and Godot as God. There are numerous elements within the play that seem to support this view. However, Beckett himself never endorsed this interpretation. According to him, the name Godot was suggested by the French slang words for boot, godillot and godasse, as feet play a prominent role in the play. (quoted from wiki)

“There’s man all over for you, blaming on his boots the faults of his feet.”

Symbiosis

In addition to the Christian allegory, there are other interpretations of the play, including Freudian, Jungian, and political ones. While I won't attempt to explain how these interpretations came about, they can be found on the internet. All of these misunderstandings seemed to irritate Beckett. He rarely provided any clues about the meaning of the play, except for once when he told one of his actors that it was about symbiosis. The play displays two relationships: the one between the two lead characters, which is that of equal friends, and the one between Pozzo and Lucky, which is a slave-master relationship. Seen from this perspective, there is a great deal of depth to the play. Vladimir and Estragon have a strange and complex relationship. They lead empty lives and have little to offer each other except the comfort of not being alone. This could also explain why there are no women or even any mention of women in the play. Perhaps the writer of the play, in the context of Game Theory, disliked women (just kidding) as they might disrupt the systems and equations he was trying to present.

“Did I ever leave you?”
“You let me go.”


Life and death

“What do they say?”
“They talk about their lives.”
“To have lived is not enough for them.”
“They have to talk about it.”

Of course, once a work of art is released, it is open to whatever interpretation the reader or viewer chooses to impose. I won't try to offer my own interpretation, but there is one more aspect of the play that I can't help but mention: the portrayal of life. Let's forget about Lucky for a moment and focus on Vladimir and Estragon. Their lives, like the play itself, have been stripped down to the bare essentials. They seem to have no meaningful relationships other than their friendship with each other. (Although at times they contemplate leaving each other, their indecisiveness prevents them from doing so.) They are probably uneducated and ignorant of most things that could be considered knowledge, except for a few random fragments. One of the reasons why the play can seem to go on and on without much happening is the absentmindedness of these two characters. They are unable to focus on what is happening around them or have a meaningful conversation. This lack of focus is due to a lack of interest. Since nothing makes them happy, nothing interests them. They have a strange memory and are completely indecisive. They seem to be lacking some essential quality that is necessary for a meaningful life, some spark or vitality. Religion offers them no solace or comfort. They are suffering from the meaninglessness of life and are so deeply affected that they are constantly debating the question of “to be or not to be.” Of course, given their indecisiveness, we need not worry about them committing suicide. And, of course, they have each other, and that seems to be enough to keep them going.
(looking at the tree) Pity we haven't got a bit of rope.

\\n  \\n    Book Review\\n  \\n
\\t4 out of 5 stars to Waiting for Godot, written in 1952 by Samuel Beckett. In this absurdist play, Beckett presents a direct commentary on universal mankind. The four characters can be divided into two distinct groups: the passive and the active. Estragon and Vladimir, the passive duo, are like the "couch potatoes" of today. They engage in the same mindless daily rituals, such as removing boots, eating carrots, and waiting for Godot. Their days blend together in a chaotic blur, with no sense of purpose or direction. On the other hand, Pozzo and Lucky represent the active elements of mankind. They are the "Energizer bunnies" who are constantly on the move, visiting new places and having new adventures. Lucky, in particular, is a bundle of energy, running around, foaming at the mouth, and reciting incomprehensible speeches. Pozzo, too, is active, constantly bossing Lucky around and exploring new territories. The play shows that the world is made up of both types of people, and that each has its own strengths and weaknesses. Beckett's characters are a vivid portrayal of the human condition, and his play is a timeless classic that continues to resonate with audiences today.


\\tEstragon and Vladimir's passivity is a reflection of their lack of agency and their acceptance of their circumstances. They do not try to change their situation or take control of their lives. Instead, they simply wait for something to happen, hoping that Godot will come and save them. Their inaction leads to a sense of boredom and frustration, as they watch their lives pass by without making any meaningful contributions. In contrast, Pozzo and Lucky's activity is a result of their drive and ambition. They are always looking for new opportunities and challenges, and they are not afraid to take risks. Their constant movement and exploration give them a sense of purpose and fulfillment, but it also comes at a cost. They are often exploited and abused by others, and their lives are filled with uncertainty and danger.


\\tOverall, Samuel Beckett's Waiting for Godot is a thought-provoking and powerful play that explores the nature of human existence. It shows that we are all part of a larger whole, and that our actions and choices have consequences. Whether we are passive or active, we all have a role to play in shaping the world around us. The play challenges us to think about our own lives and to question our assumptions about what it means to be human. It is a must-read for anyone interested in theater, philosophy, or the human condition.


\\n  \\n    About Me\\n  \\n
For those new to me or my reviews... here's the scoop: I read A LOT. I write A LOT. And now I blog A LOT. First the book review goes on Goodreads, and then I send it on over to my WordPress blog at https://thisismytruthnow.com, where you'll also find TV & Film reviews, the revealing and introspective 365 Daily Challenge and lots of blogging about places I've visited all over the world. And you can find all my social media profiles to get the details on the who/what/when/where and my pictures. Leave a comment and let me know what you think. Vote in the poll and ratings. Thanks for stopping by.

How many times in your life have you waited? How many times has your hope failed while you were waiting? How many times has your hope failed while you were waiting and you are still waiting?

In a very concise way, this is a play about waiting, and when you are in the middle of it and waiting for it to end, it will not end and it will leave you with a storm of questions!

I knew very well what the Theater of the Absurd was and had a previous experience with it through Tawfiq al-Hakim and the play "Oh You Who Climb the Tree", but I was not a fan of it, and if it were not for this play being required during my studies, I would not have thought of reading it at all.

In this play, which is filled with strange, dark, and melancholy air, you don't understand what they are doing? What are they saying? There is no logic in the speech or in anything.. just chaos in chaos, and when you smell the smell of my grandfather's speech and he says it will be the beginning, you are surprised that there is nothing.. until when you reach the end, you will find yourself trapped! Where is Godot in the midst of all this absurdity?

Beckett has made you wait for Godot too, made you live under the illusion that suddenly you will understand the whole play with the arrival of this so-called Godot who will save everyone including you.. but my dear, there is no Godot and no one will come.. and you will still be waiting!

One of the strangest scenes that will remain in my memory for a considerable period is when the servant "Lucky" decides to think - although he has been ordered to do so - but look at the text of his speech.. look at the amount of illogicality and absurdity in his speech.. you will not understand anything at all.. but you will find in the middle of his speech a feeling of sadness, weakness, and oppression.. for he is a servant to his master Pozzo.

As for our two main heroes, they have many absurd situations such as the situation of the hat and the boots.. despite everything.. I liked them in a certain way.. why? I don't know.. everything is illogical.