Twenty-two hundred years before the emergence of the Theater of the Absurd, the Greek philosopher Artistotle stumbled upon one of the themes developed in Samuel Beckett’s play Waiting for Godot; that is, that Thought (Dianoia) is expressed through Diction and that Thought (Theoria) is in itself a form of Action (Energeia). Intellectual action is thus measured equally in comparison to physical action. Over the centuries, theories regarding thought, action and language have evolved considerably, but certain underlying themes in Beckett’s unconventional work can trace their origins back to Aristotle’s original concepts concerning drama, namely the relationships between language, thought and the action involved in contemplation.

Aristotle proposes that Thought and Diction imitate Action. In Beckett’s Waiting for Godot, it is possible to see a similar pattern (that when taken a step further is no longer linear but circular), in which Language permits the existence of Thought which in turn becomes vicarious Action. (Ironically, this whole process which is portrayed by Beckett on-stage is equivalent to the art of theater itself which, manifested through language, permits the audience offstage, whose witnessing of a play replaces imagining it, to undergo the same process in acting vicariously through the characters.) The first and more interesting part of the process is best illustrated by the ending of both acts when Vladimir, and then Estragon, says "Yes, let’s go" and the stage directions indicate "They do not move". It suffices simply to say and subsequently to think of leaving, for there is no more meaning in the vicarious action than in its actual physical manifestation.

Further evidence of the theory of the irrelevance of physical action in relation to vicarious action is present throughout the play, and strongly established by the repetition of the opening line: "Nothing to be done." There is nothing worth doing because, in existential theory, man's life is meaningless; therefore, while passing the time until death, the easiest course of action is thought or vicarious action rather than actually physically doing anything. This idea is reiterated by Estragon who later says "No use struggling" to which Vladimir replies "The essential doesn't change." Vladimir has concluded that life is not just a case of making the appropriate effort because no matter how much he has tried before it made no difference.

To struggle being thus useless, the two hobos choose to live out their lives in thought rather than action because it is the best way to prove to themselves that they do indeed exist at all. This existence confirming thought is only created through language because without words it is impossible to describe those abstract concepts which allow man to theorize existence. Without language, it is impossible to even think "I exist" because there are no words or frame of reference with which to formulate this thought, in the same way that art cannot be formed without colors and a brush. The need for words with which to formulate thoughts, both about existence (Theoria) and other things in general (Dianoia), is expressed urgently by Vladimir who cries during the silences, "Say something" followed by "Say anything at all!" He adds later, however, that there is "No need to shout" for this would only be a futile action that adds nothing to the thought itself or the imaginary action it creates.

It is with words and thoughts that Vladimir and Estragon succeed in their most difficult task: to pass the time. This subject is brought up at the end of most of the little episodes that constitute the play. Interacting with Pozzo and Lucky or simply conversing among themselves are not moments to be appreciated in themselves, but each is merely a "diversion" that helps to pass the time, for time poses a serious problem for them. Time, in the chronological sense, is used to measure the duration of actions, but because actions are meaningless, time must be as well.

Beckett makes it very clear that he believes that time is completely meaningless. After becoming blind Pozzo furiously gives the audience his theory about time:

However, even though life, actions and time all appear to be meaningless, it is still necessary to pass the time; not the time spent waiting for Godot, but rather the time between birth and inevitable death that is devoted to a life which in any case is meaningless. Life and time are both meaningless, so unless the characters find some way to pass this time, they must put an end to their lives (which explains the two failed suicide attempts). They are stuck with one or the other and must deal with at least one of them no matter how meaningless that may be. They choose thus to pass the time with words which are easier than struggling with meaningless actions, because, in any case, there is little difference for them between imagining doing something and really doing it.

Gérard Durozoi also perceives language in Waiting for Godot as a way to pass the time. He says "il faut parler pour... meubler le temps." This idea of furnishing time again implies that it is empty or meaningless. He adds that "la parole... ne vise qu'à se dire", that is, speech serves to prove that one exists. "On parle pour se sentir être". He goes on to explain, however, that it is not enough to speak of oneself to prove one's existence, but there must be someone else to confirm this as well:

This interactive dialogue between Vladimir and Estragon is the basis of most of the play. It is of this that Estragon speaks when he says, "We always find something, eh Didi, to give us the impression we exist?" right after he comments "We don't manage too bad, eh Didi, between the two of us?" They stay together because of their mutual dependence to confirm the other's existence:

Beckett portrays this principle of interdependency several times in the play. From the very beginning, the audience is made aware that Estragon cannot survive without Vladimir. Estragon has spent the night separated from Vladimir and the result was that he was beaten and forced to sleep in a ditch. Vladimir, the stronger of the two intellectually, is equally dependent on Estragon, for it is he who was worried by his friend's absence, expresses joy at his return, and calls for a celebration.

Attention is again drawn to their mutual need for self-confirmation by a few short words which seem to sum up the question. The second day, after once again finding Estragon, Vladimir states, "(Joyous.) There you are again... (Indifferent.) There we are again... (Gloomy.) There I am again." While conversing with Estragon is necessary to confirm his own existence, it also forces Vladimir to accept this existence whether he wants to or not as well as the total emptiness associated with it. It's fine for him to know that he exists, but the loss of any possible denial of this also provokes his despair.

This despair, which is provoked by the reality of existence and brought on by its confirmation through language, is also paradoxically the reason why Vladimir urges Estragon to "say something". As Estragon has just mentioned, "it is so [they] won't think" about the emptiness of their existence which is confirmed by each other, and which cannot be denied because they are tied to each other by their mutual dependence. In this case, language leads to a different kind of action-creating thought whose purpose is to provide another "diversion" (like the second episode with Pozzo an Lucky) rather than vicarious action (like leaving). This is their attempt at deep reflection which is action in itself by being the process of diversion from reality.

The relationship between Pozzo and Lucky shows the same interdependency needed to confirm existence, and even to give a false purpose to a meaningless life which is found in their contrived master/slave relationship.

Vladimir and Estragon also give themselves a false purpose to pass the time between their births and inevitable deaths, and this false purpose is of course the completely hopeless act of waiting for Godot. However, in another sense, waiting for Godot is not a contrived purpose, but rather an obligation; that is, it is a metaphor for waiting for their death. Even if Godot, or death, "won't come this evening... surely to-morrow." It is only a matter of time and in the meantime everything else is meaningless, be it the episodes with Pozzo and Lucky or anything else man does in life. Furthermore, there is nothing man nor Estragon or Vladimir can do about this situation, short of suicide, except wait.

Lucky's long senseless speech is another futile attempt at imposing man's rationality in a world that is empty of reason, in this case through language, not altogether different from the two couples' attempt to do so by devising false purposes in life. He is unable to say anything coherent, much like man in existential theory who can't impose logic on the universe. Worse yet, Lucky is also unable to inspire a stable mental image with his words thus failing to create any vicarious action to save temporarily the others from the emptiness of their existence. If anything, this illogic explosion shows the imperative need in man for images grown from coherent language in order to rescue humanity from the chaotic mess which ensues in the skirmish for Lucky's hat.

Of course, the idea of the rejection of all real action in favor of vicarious action through thought is far from easy for man to accept, but in Waiting for Godot, the audience sees that all attempts at real action end in failure. Estragon expresses his anguish and difficulty in accepting inaction and cries, "Nothing happens, nobody comes, nobody goes, it's awful!" Vladimir also reiterates this feeling later in the play when he pleas, "Let's not waste our time in idle discourse! Let us do something while we have the chance!" Their attempts at rebellion of language and thought in order to undertake real action are never successful however. When they try to intervene to help Pozzo and Lucky who are stuck on the ground in a heap, the result is that they too are pulled down. It would have been more profitable for them to imagine themselves as heroes and continue their idle discourse while Pozzo and Lucky were finding their own solution to their problem. Vladimir and Estragon are also fail to hang themselves. Finally, the repetitive nature of the play in which each day is like the latter, indicates that all the daily episodes of action, meeting Pozzo and Lucky as well as the Boy, are all futile and accomplish nothing. Since nothing comes of these incidents, they are doomed to be repeated until the characters realize the senselessness of their actions and thus abandon them. When Estragon ventures off, he is beaten, but as long as they there and do nothing, their lives may be empty but at least no harm comes to them in the process. As observed Vladimir Maiakovski, "aucune douleur existentielle n'est aussi pénible qu'un clou dans son soulier", or, in other words, life may be meaningless but it's better to accept it and leave it alone than make things worse.

The best metaphor for the existential philosophy expressed in Waiting for Godot is resumed by Vladimir who comments about the condition of Estragon's feet: "There's man all over for you, blaming on his boots the faults of his feet." The boots represent god, for each is an external object that man contrives to protect himself. Beckett is saying that man should not blame the devices that he creates when they fail to protect him from himself, but should rather accept the responsibility for their failure as he is the creator of those devices. If god does not fill man's existential void, instead of hopelessly waiting for that unreliable god to come and rescue him, he should consider looking to himself to resolve the problem of the meaninglessness of his life.

Bibliography

Aristotle. Poetics. Tr. S.H. Butler. New York: Hill and Wang, 1977
Beckett, Samuel. Waiting for Godot. New York: Grove Press, 1954
Durozoi, Gérald. Beckett. Paris: Bordas, 1972

© 1998 pantagruelle.geo@yahoo.com