Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Dedication
- Contents
- Authors’ Note
- Samuel Beckett (1906–1989): The Last Literary Giant
- Dialogue I Messianism: Pros and Cons: Waiting for Godot (1949)
- Dialogue II The Tyranny of the Emancipated Mind: Endgame (1956)
- Dialogue III The Fiasco of Self-Creation: Krapp's Last Tape (1958)
- Dialogue IV Incorrigible Optimism: Happy Days (1961)
- Dialogue V The Comic Side of Pessimism: Rough for Theatre II (late 1950s)
- Dialogue VI Life as Purgatory: Play (1962)
- Dialogue VII Darkness and Forms of Speech: Not I (1972)
- Dialogue VIII Inventing Oneself: That Time (1974)
- Dialogue IX Life without a Father: Footfalls (1975)
- Dialogue X Creatures of the Night: …but the clouds… (1976)
- Dialogue XI The Abyss of the Unconscious: Ohio Impromptu (1981)
- Dialogue XII Catastrophe with No Tragedy: Catastrophe (1982)
Dialogue I - Messianism: Pros and Cons: Waiting for Godot (1949)
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 30 March 2019
- Frontmatter
- Dedication
- Contents
- Authors’ Note
- Samuel Beckett (1906–1989): The Last Literary Giant
- Dialogue I Messianism: Pros and Cons: Waiting for Godot (1949)
- Dialogue II The Tyranny of the Emancipated Mind: Endgame (1956)
- Dialogue III The Fiasco of Self-Creation: Krapp's Last Tape (1958)
- Dialogue IV Incorrigible Optimism: Happy Days (1961)
- Dialogue V The Comic Side of Pessimism: Rough for Theatre II (late 1950s)
- Dialogue VI Life as Purgatory: Play (1962)
- Dialogue VII Darkness and Forms of Speech: Not I (1972)
- Dialogue VIII Inventing Oneself: That Time (1974)
- Dialogue IX Life without a Father: Footfalls (1975)
- Dialogue X Creatures of the Night: …but the clouds… (1976)
- Dialogue XI The Abyss of the Unconscious: Ohio Impromptu (1981)
- Dialogue XII Catastrophe with No Tragedy: Catastrophe (1982)
Summary
Janusz Pyda OP: Let's start with the fundamental question: Who is Godot? The play's protagonists seem unsure. In fact, they have no idea. Estragon is clueless, while Vladimir, the only character in favour of waiting for Godot, is incapable of describing what he looks like, let alone explaining the circumstances of their meeting or the reason for his conviction that Godot can change their destiny. He nevertheless claims that they have both met Godot once before and that Godot promised to meet them again. In short, Vladimir is not credible and gives one nothing to go on.
When Beckett was asked the same question, he would reply indirectly or by negation: ‘If I knew, I wouldn't have written the play’ was his standard answer. He is also on record as saying, ‘If I knew, I would have said so in the play,’ or again, ‘If by Godot I had meant God, I would have said God and not Godot.’ For me the most interesting of his very few comments on the subject is the following: ‘I do not know who Godot is. I do not even know if he exists. And I do not know if they believe he does, these two who are waiting for him.’ One thing emerges clearly from all this: the author does not place himself above the reader/audience; there is nothing that only he knows and wants to conceal from them. He does not even place himself in a privileged position in relation to his own text. Like the audience/reader, he knows only what can be deduced from the text, nothing more.
So the text is all we have. And the text, full as it is of uncertainties and unknowns, things murky and obliquely hinted at, does seem to tell us one thing with certainty, namely, that whether or not Godot exists, whether or not he really did meet the protagonists somewhere or is merely a figment of their imagination, he is a person. The protagonists are not waiting for an event or a thing, like manna from heaven; they are waiting for a person. Is this really something we can be certain of? And if so, what does it entail?
Antoni Libera: Yes, that is definitely something we can be certain of, and it entails a number of important things.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Dialogues on BeckettWhatever Happened to God?, pp. 3 - 14Publisher: Anthem PressPrint publication year: 2019