The Dramatic Effect of Relationships in Waiting for Godot

In reference to the passage below, discuss the dramatic effect of relationships in Waiting for Godot:

 Waiting for Godot mainly revolves around the relationship between Estragon and Vladimir who the audience are introduced to initially in the play as well as the extract. However, relationships in Waiting for Godot are shown to also be abstract such as the relationships with time, in which time dissolves and distorts resulting in a loss of certainty. Vladimir and Estragon also show a relationship with the audience as well as the environment within the extract and throughout the play mainly expressed through Beckett’s use of staging.

The relationship between Estragon and Vladimir draws attention to the comedy, and the cyclical nature of the play. The stichomythic dialogue (“A bush” “a shrub” “a bush”) draws out the comedic nature of the play between Estragon and Vladimir. The use of comedy is an escape mechanism used by Estragon and Vladimir as a means of passing time and avoiding the action of waiting. It could also be an allusion to the human condition in which suffering is provided a momentary relief through comedy. The relief that Vladimir and Estragon are “waiting for” is the arrival of Godot, which is consistently indefinite hence they are constantly suffering from the “horror of [the] situation”. This suffering is also mimed out to the audience through the use of stage directions where Estragon frequently is in physical pain and “limping”. The difference between Estragon and Vladimir is conveyed by the use of actions and cycles. While Estragon and Vladimir may seem very similar to the audience initially, it can be seen that Vladimir and Estragon have various perceptions of suffering. While Estragon is constantly concerned with the physical for example when he tries to pull off his hat, Vladimir is concerned with his mind, which is demonstrated, by the action of continuously taking off his hat and replacing it. The use of cycles and repetition not only through actions but also through language creates an echo like nature to the play and as mentioned by Richard Schechner give the play a centripetal structure in which all actions are focused on the agency of waiting. This can be seen throughout the opening of the play with the alternate reference to the phrase “nothing to be done” by both Estragon and Vladimir. Within the extract the most obvious example of direct imitation is when both character exactly say “what did we do yesterday”. The action of waiting becomes progressively more prominent throughout the play because of the recurring phrases said by Estragon and Vladimir. While the use of the relationship between Estragon and Vladimir on the surface provides comedy, their relationship links to a larger theme of uncertainty (“nothing is certain when you’re about”) and interdependence. Vladimir and Estragon both depend on one another in order be aware of themselves for example when Estragon replies “Am I?” to Vladimir’s statement “here you are again”. This interdependence also links to the contrast between fear of loneliness and lack of truly understanding one another. Estragon and Vladimir constantly rely on each other to try and not pay attention to the act of waiting. This fear of loneliness is expressed directly within the passage when Vladimir wakes Estragon from his sleep because he “felt lonely”. However this action is directly contrasted with Vladimir’s refusal to listen to Estragon as he attempts to explain the “nightmare” he experienced. The disconnect between the characters is also previously made clear by certain instances when one of the characters wishes to embrace while the other doesn’t or for example when Estragon tries to explain the pain of his foot while Vladimir pays no attention to what he is saying.

While Estragon and Vladimir may be dependent on one another, they are even more dependent on Godot. In similarity to the master slave bond between Lucky and Pozzo, Estragon and Vladimir could be considered as having a master-slave relationship with Godot, as they are “tied” to Godot. Godot acts as their anchor and almost sense of purpose, which is undermined by the constant atmosphere of uncertainty. Much like Lucky, Vladimir and Estragon rely on the mastery of task, in order to gain recognition and a sense of self. However, while Lucky accomplishes his tasks and almost becomes closer to a state of consciousness, Estragon and Vladimir will only gain recognition upon the arrival of Godot due to the continuity of the action of waiting (shown in the passage: “Until he comes” “you’re merciless”). As a result the audience feels as though the play is taking place in some limbo as there is never enough information provided for the audience to figure out the context of the play.

Furthermore, the relationship between Estragon, Vladimir and time is elucidated within this passage bringing out the dramatic effect of the distortion of time. Throughout the extract Estragon and Vladimir constantly question what their relation to time is. They cannot remember what they did “yesterday” and as a result due to the unusual nature of the setting of the play at “evening” makes it hard for not only the characters but also the audience to distinguish time. This is due to the use of liminality in the play where time is distorted and they are stuck in a time where it is not morning nor is it night (dusk). As a result the plays seems to almost be in a constant loop. The idea of cycles is established through the repetition in the dialogue but also through actions. At the start of the play Estragon is caught in a transient loop of struggling to take off his boot, giving up and then “resuming the struggle”. Additionally, the use of repetition of highlights the temporal lexis and further confuses the time. This confusion of time is also seen within the language of Estragon and Vladimir for example between eachother through three lines of dialogue they use three different tenses “He didn’t say he’d come”, “And if he doesn’t come?”, “We’ll come back tomorrow”. The placement of the past tense “he didn’t say” and the conditional of “he’d come”, showcase just how they are uncertain of the past and the future, however their present action of “waiting for Godot” anchors their certainty. Time as a result acts as a means for them to assert their own existence between each other. While every phrase of trying to assert time is uncertain either ending with a question mark, “but what Saturday?”, or an uncertain remark such as “I think”, it is again drawing the attention of the audience to the agency of waiting, highlighting the absurdness of the drama.