Apart from the concepts and symbols that Beckett's works have, something that I really enjoy is these simple dialogues and the strange and contradictory personalities of his characters.

For example (from the text of the book):

Clov: So you want me to leave you alone after me?

Hamm: Of course.

Clov: Then I'll leave you alone.

Hamm: You can't leave us alone.

Clov: Then I won't leave you alone.

:)

These dialogues seem so simple on the surface, but they actually convey deep and complex emotions and thoughts. The relationship between Clov and Hamm is full of contradictions and uncertainties. They seem to depend on each other, but at the same time, they also want to break free. This kind of complex personality and relationship is one of the important features of Beckett's works. It makes readers think about the meaning of life, the nature of human relationships, and other profound issues.

In conclusion, Beckett's works are not only about strange concepts and symbols, but also about the real emotions and thoughts of human beings. His simple dialogues and complex characters can touch the hearts of readers and make them think deeply about life.

Second reading and it seems that even this time it wasn't enough. I let the work come to me and I wait. "The end is within the beginning and yet we continue." The recollection of the moments with light - if there ever were any - has been lost, however. "Isn't this the sunlight I feel on my face? No." The masks fall for Ham. I have grown tired of the stories. Two years ago, upon first encounter, I had written that Nank and Nell... who laugh with the misfortune of the world and have their hearts in their heads, brought to my mind the poem of Sachthouris, The Scene. I will remain at the same weight that I felt then. What makes the difference now is the awareness of how delicately Beckett stands beside his tyrannized heroes, who now see without glasses their inhuman solitude.

*The book is very good from the Editions Ypsilon

"On the table they had placed
A head made of clay
They had decorated the walls
With flowers
On the bed they had cut out from paper
Two erotic bodies
On the floor snakes were slithering
And petals
A big dog guarded
In the corner

Sponges were crossing the room from all
Sides
But no one was wise
To pull them
One of the sponges was spraying the bodies
Into love

Misfortune from outside
Was pounding at the doors"

In some cases, reading a book with a bad translation is equivalent to not reading it at all.

And almost nothing of the play could I say that I noticed.

In some places, based on the translation, it was so meaningless that it was possible to guess what terms the author in English had used.

We often encounter such situations where the quality of the translation significantly affects our understanding and enjoyment of the original work. A bad translation can distort the intended meaning, make the text difficult to follow, and even lead to misunderstandings. It is essential for translators to have a good command of both the source and target languages, as well as a deep understanding of the cultural context and the author's intentions. Only then can they produce a translation that accurately conveys the essence of the original and allows readers to fully appreciate it.

It is my very first encounter with a book by Samuel Beckett. Having read numerous positive reviews about his writing styles from the literati, I decided to start with a relatively thin one to get a sense of how remarkable this writer truly is.

Unfortunately, this particular work has proven to be extremely confusing to understand. I am completely unable to make out the sequence of the story. The characters seem to talk non-stop, and it's difficult to follow their train of thought. There are apparently two main characters who engage in philosophical conversations with one another. Then, out of nowhere, other characters make brief cameo appearances, further adding to the confusion. I found myself asking, "What on earth is going on here?" (laughs).

Nevertheless, I persisted in reading. When I looked up the play on Wikipedia, I finally discovered the real concept behind it, and I was truly impressed. I have never before seen or read a play where two characters have a conversation next to their own habitats, which in this case are dustbins. What an otherworldly and unique scene!

The play features just four characters: Hamm, who is unable to stand and is blind; Clov, Hamm's servant, who is unable to sit; Nagg, Hamm's father, who has no legs and lives in a dustbin; and Nell, Hamm's mother, who also has no legs and lives in a dustbin next to Nagg.

In the end, I am still left boggled by the philosophical discourse among the characters. It presents a challenge that I am determined to overcome as I attempt to read his other books, especially his trilogies.

If I were to watch its stage play, I have a feeling that I would enjoy it even more. ^^

I don't know what the fuck she's saying.

But girl, I am living.

I just go with the flow and enjoy the moment. Maybe her words are a mystery, but that doesn't stop me from experiencing life to the fullest.

I dance to the rhythm of my own heart, not caring about the confusion around me.

Each day is a new adventure, and I'm ready to embrace it with open arms.

Whether it's good or bad, I'll take it all and make the most of it.

So, even though I don't understand what she's saying, I'm still living my best life.

I'm shining bright like a star, and nothing can dim my光芒.

Because I know that life is too short to worry about the things we can't control.

I'm just going to keep on living and loving every second of it.

This play makes us laugh out loud all the time, but it also makes us feel melancholy. We don't feel melancholy because of the plot, as it has no real plot. Instead, we feel melancholy because of the perspective that Beckett has on life, which is something very fascinating for Beckett.

Beckett seems to think that having a life means being trapped in a cycle of doing the same things over and over again without end. Meanwhile, the end point of life never really comes, just like death is playing hide and seek. (Hamm wants to end his life but is hesitant to do so, and although he is old and frail and could die at any time, he still refuses to die.) Trying to escape from this life is also something that is truly impossible. (Clov wants to leave the room full of old people but in the end, he always comes back to see Hamm.) The repetition and strangeness of the fascinating behavior, such as doing things that are contrary to what was said before or doing things in a slow and lazy way, and the way of answering each other with cryptic words as if they are from different stories, is a kind of chaotic repetition. Because it is a repetition in the unhappiness of human fate and a repetition in a life that is extremely meaningless and without any substance, unable to hold onto anything at all.

The original article seems to be missing. Please provide the article so that I can rewrite and expand it for you.

**An Absurd Masterpiece**

One of the most fascinating aspects of Beckett's plays is his resistance to providing interpretations. He seems to go against the grain by denying certain common interpretations without offering alternatives. For example, when asked if Godot represents God or if Endgame is set in a post-apocalyptic world, his answers are both no. However, the title 'Endgame' implies a play about endings, specifically an ending that the protagonist refuses to accept.

The term 'Endgame' in chess refers to the final stage of the game, where the winner is often already determined, yet the loser persists in a futile struggle for victory. This concept aligns well with the theatre of the absurd, highlighting the idea of continuing to exist and fight despite being in a losing position with no escape.

In the play, the main character is Hamm, a blind and immobile man completely reliant on his servant Clov, who cannot sit. Hamm's interactions are mainly with Clov, although there are occasional appearances by his parents, Nagg and Nell, who are confined to barrels. Hamm clings to hope despite the end being near for him, while Clov is torn between leaving and staying due to his obligations to Hamm.

The question of whether the world in the play is post-apocalyptic may be beside the point, as it seems to be beyond the play's scope. However, the suggestion that everything has been lost brings this question back into focus. This ties into the theme of the title, as those in a post-apocalyptic world are fighting a losing battle not just to survive but to win.

Another interesting motif is blindness. Just as the characters in the play may be blind to their situation, Hamm is blind to his own dependence on Clov. Hamm is like the king, reliant on Clov, the queen. Without Clov, he is helpless. Clov, on the other hand, is also in a difficult position, as there is nothing outside the room. To have meaning, Clov must stay as Hamm's servant, as that is his defined role.

I recently witnessed a performance of this play and have shared more thoughts on my blog.

Samuel Beckett's works are known for their unique blend of absurdity, wit, humor, and darkness. It's truly a signature style that sets him apart.

Here are some of his most memorable lines that have left a lasting impression on readers.

The first line, "The end is in the beginning and yet you go on," seems to suggest a circular nature of life, where the conclusion is somehow inherent in the start, yet we continue to journey forward.

His statement, "I love order, it's my dream. A world where all would be silent and still and each thing in its last place, under the dust," reveals a longing for a static and orderly existence, perhaps in contrast to the chaos and uncertainty of the real world.

The simple yet profound line, "If I don't kill the rat he'll die," plays with the idea of inevitability and the role we play in the fate of others.

The exchange between Hamm and Clov adds a touch of absurdity and confusion. Hamm's repeated calls for his father and Clov's ambiguous responses create a sense of mystery and a lack of clear communication.

Overall, Beckett's words have the power to make us think, laugh, and perhaps even feel a little uneasy, as they explore the complex and often strange nature of human existence.

**Title: An In-depth Analysis of "Endgame" by Beckett**

"Endgame" is a play that strongly resists any philosophical, symbolic, or representative interpretation. Like other works of Beckett, we are never presented with a complete picture here, and a completely desolate situation is presented in the form of a show. Instead of stating the lack of meaning, "Endgame" visually shows this lack.

The end will come not with a mighty explosion, but with a wail and a howl of grief
T.S. Eliot

The play begins with Clov entering the stage, closing the curtains of the two windows, furtively looking outside, and then removing the rugs. Hugh Kenner says about such a beginning: This movement is so clearly an allegory for awakening that one can imagine the entire stage and its surroundings as the inner world of a human skull. If this interpretation is correct, the entire play can be considered as a representation of a few minutes in the desolate and exceptional inner world of a human. This is why this work of Beckett has a less elaborate plot compared to his other works. The human has no way out but the pebbles of his dwelling. The opening words of Clov refer to this: It's all over. Nearly all over, it must be nearly all over. Particle by particle, one by one, and suddenly one day a handful of them, a small handful, an unbearable handful. So "Endgame" is an ordinary day, like the other days. With the difference that in the end, the density of the days has turned into a totality called life. At the end, a dialogue on the same subject is repeated by "Hamm": Moment by moment, it trickles away, like the cheap grains (hesitates)... that old Greek and all his life waiting for this handful to become a drop in the ocean. The phrase It's all over at the beginning of the play can be seen as an allusion to the last words of Christ on the cross, where Christ crucified cried out "It is finished" and then gave up his spirit. These words define the essence of the entire play.

In different parts of the play, the meaning is clearly eroded: Hamm: Will our words ever have a meaning?
Clov: Have a meaning? My words and yours have a meaning? (Short laugh) That was one of the delicious words. In the stage directions, it is also stated that a picture should be hung on the wall inside the room and behind it for the audience to see, which is an allegory of the absence of meaning in the play.

Nagg and Nell, two characters in the ashbins, are the father and mother of "Hamm". The pain between these two can be considered the most prominent emotional connection in the story. Nagg may be the old age of Estragon and Nell the old age of Vladimir. The relationship between Clov and Hamm is also reminiscent of the relationship between Lucky and Pozzo. Between Hamm and Clov, there is a relationship of God and servitude. It seems that there is a connection between the names of these two and their roles. Clov in French is similar to the word "hook" and Hamm in English is similar to the word "crutch".

Unlike traditional family plays where family values are upheld, in "Endgame", the authenticity of these values is lost along with everything else, and the play moves towards a post-tragic state. The awareness of the characters of their emptiness and what they have lost is greater than that of the parallel characters in "Waiting for Godot", and for this reason, they suffer more pain and torture.

The events of the play take place in a very unfamiliar and strange world. Outside, it is completely arid, dark, and dead. The memories of the characters belong to our world, but their current world is empty and full of the spirit of death. The characters of "Endgame" often take refuge in the memories of the good past. However, these memories are nothing more than illusions. Beckett believes that the recall of memories is inherently corrupt and worthless and stems more from inner needs than from a real experience.

The story of the play, while having a definite end in time, is also based on the interesting events of daily life. The element of waiting, unlike in "Waiting for Godot", is not expecting salvation and hope for postponement, but rather the consolation of the end and the conclusion: Clov says sadly that there are many terrible things, and Hamm replies no! Now there are not so many. For Hamm and Clov, who are waiting for the end, the perspective of a new beginning is very disturbing. The reason for "Hamm" being horrified by seeing a flea in Clov's trousers and a mouse in the kitchen is also this: Hamm: Mankind may start all over again from here! Just give God his due! And then it is the turn of a mouse to appear. At the end of the play, a small boy, the potential agent of reproduction, is seen. Is this evolutionary process of flea to mouse and mouse to small boy in "Endgame" a glimmer of hope?

In the story, "Hamm" also confronts a small boy. Who is this boy? Does he have a connection with the boy outside the window? Or with Clov's childhood? Beckett, as expected, answered this question as follows: I don't know if this story is about Clov's childhood or not, I don't know, that's all. Like in "Waiting for Godot", in "Endgame" we are also faced with the duality of time. On the one hand, time is a factor of repetition, compulsion, and sequence (the play begins and ends in the same way), and on the other hand, it is a factor of corruption and destruction (the reality is lost, the pebbles and the ashes are all gone, etc.). Therefore, the characters of this play, in addition to space, are also bound in terms of time.

The use of elements of French farce is also prominent in "Endgame". These elements not only have a visual aspect but also define the repetitive and theatrical nature of life at the same time. For example, the phrases "It's all over" and "There's something going on" are conscious references to the passing and ending of the play, when Clov points his telescope at the audience or when Clov threatens to leave and Hamm says he cannot leave the stage because of the dialogue! Another prominent example is the integration of Clov's existential dilemma in the role and the repetition of the role as a loophole. As Clov and Hamm say "What's the use of this daily farce of God?"

Reading Beckett's works is a big mistake for those audiences who are waiting to encounter tragic and exciting events in the play. However, for another group, these works are a mirror of their entire life, facing a bitter reality. A life without meaning and value, lost in everydayness.

I give this work of Beckett 5 stars and less than 1 to this translated version!

This is my second encounter with Samuel Beckett's play "Endgame", and I have to admit that I am far more impressed this time around.

I read it for a British Literature class last year, but failed to understand its point. The play seemed to revolve around nothingness, lacking a distinct plot or character development.

However, after reading it again, I have reached the conclusion that this is precisely the essence of the entire work. Beckett has his characters engage in endless arguments and change their minds in the very next sentence.

The play possesses a very dark sense of humor, which I truly appreciate. This touch of humor enables one to access the core of the story.

The story is a satire on the absurdities of life and the various ways in which people connect or fail to connect with one another. It is a relatively short read, yet the subject matter can be somewhat challenging to comprehend.

Nevertheless, I ultimately found it both humorous and satisfying.

As with all revisited Beckett, it is truly much funnier than one might have remembered.

His works possess a unique charm that never fails to amuse and engage.

Moreover, they are still otherwise peerlessly brilliant.

Their depth and complexity continue to astound readers and critics alike.

'Better than nothing! Is it possible?' This simple yet profound question encapsulates the essence of Beckett's exploration of the human condition.

It makes us wonder about the true value and meaning of our existence.

Beckett's ability to pose such thought-provoking questions while also providing moments of hilarity is what sets him apart as a literary genius.

His works are a testament to the power of art to both entertain and enlighten.

Revisiting them is always a rewarding experience that leaves us with a deeper appreciation for his remarkable talent.