NAME : Mahida Bhumika Prakashbhai
M A Sem - 2
ROLL NUMBER : 4
ENROLLMENT NUMBER :3069206420200021
SUBJECT : Paper 107: The Twentieth Century Literature: From World War II to the End of the Century
ASSIGNMENT TOPIC : 'Waiting for Godot' A metaphor for COVID-19
Introduction:
During the 1930s and 1940s, Samuel Beckett wrote his first novels and short stories. He wrote a trilogy of novels in the 1950s as well as famous plays like Waiting for Godot. In 1969 he was awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature.
As a critic, a transitional thinker, an innovator, and a postmodernist who probed the human condition and sensed the absurdity of the modern world, Beckett tried to link art and life into unusual theatrical images in order to etch human beings' inner world and the human experience of consciousness.
Waiting For Godot
The Play opens with Two men, Vladimir and Estragon, meet near a tree. They converse on various topics and reveal that they are waiting there for a man named Godot. While they wait, two other men enter. Pozzo is on his way to the market to sell his slave, Lucky. He pauses for a while to converse with Vladimir and Estragon. Lucky entertains them by dancing and thinking, and Pozzo and Lucky leave.
After Pozzo and Lucky leave, a boy enters and tells Vladimir that he is a messenger from Godot. He tells Vladimir that Godot will not be coming tonight, but that he will surely come tomorrow. Vladimir asks him some questions about Godot and the boy departs. After his departure, Vladimir and Estragon decide to leave, but they do not move as the curtain falls.
The next night, Vladimir and Estragon again meet near the tree to wait for Godot. Lucky and Pozzo enter again, but this time Pozzo is blind and Lucky is dumb. Pozzo does not remember meeting the two men the night before. They leave and Vladimir and Estragon continue to wait.
The most important example of hidden meanings in the play is Godot, which is similar to God. Godot symbolizes salvation that religion promises but never comes true. Estragon means “tarragon” in French, while Pozzo is Italian for water.
Although very existentialist in its characterizations, Waiting for Godot is primarily about hope. The play revolves around Vladimir and Estragon and their pitiful wait for hope to arrive. At various times during the play, hope is constructed as a form of salvation, in the personages of Pozzo and Lucky, or even as death. The subject of the play quickly becomes an example of how to pass the time in a situation which offers no hope. Thus the theme of the play is set by the beginning:
Estragon: Nothing to be done.
Vladimir: I'm beginning to come round to that opinion.
Although the phrase is used in connection to Estragon's boots here, it is also later used by Vladimir with respect to his hat. Essentially it describes the hopelessness of their lives.
A direct result of this hopelessness is the daily struggle to pass the time. Thus, most of the play is dedicated to devising games which will help them pass the time. This mutual desire also addresses the question of why they stay together. Both Vladimir and Estragon admit to being happier when apart. One of the main reasons that they continue their relationship is that they need one another to pass the time.
Since passing the time is their mutual occupation, Estragon struggles to find games to help them accomplish their goal. Thus they engage in insulting one another and in asking each other questions.
The difficulty for Beckett of keeping a dialogue running for so long is overcome by making his characters forget everything. Estragon cannot remember anything past what was said immediately prior to his lines. Vladimir, although possessing a better memory, distrusts what he remembers. And since Vladimir cannot rely on Estragon to remind him of things, he too exists in a state of forgetfulness.
Another second reason for why they are together arises from the existentialism of their forgetfulness. Since Estragon cannot remember anything, he needs Vladimir to tell him his history. It is as if Vladimir is establishing Estragon's identity by remembering for him. Estragon also serves as a reminder for Vladimir of all the things they have done together. Thus both men serve to remind the other man of his very existence. This is necessary since no one else in the play ever remembers them:
Vladimir: We met yesterday. (Silence) Do you not remember?
Pozzo: I don't remember having met anyone yesterday. But to-morrow I won't remember having met anyone to-day. So don't count on me to enlighten you.
Later on the same thing happens with the boy who claims to have never seen them before. This lack of reassurance about their very existence makes it all the more necessary that they remember each other.
Estragon and Vladimir are not only talking to pass the time, but also to avoid the voices that arise out of the silence. Beckett's heroes in other works are also constantly assailed by voices which arise out of the silence, so this is a continuation of a theme the author uses frequently:
E: In the meantime let's try and converse calmly, since we're incapable of keeping silent.
V: You're right, we're inexhaustible.
E: It's so we won't think.
V: We have that excuse.
E: It's so we won't hear.
V: We have our reasons.
E: All the dead voices.
V: They make a noise like wings.
E: Like leaves.
V: Like sand.
E: Like leaves.
Silence.
V: They all speak at once.
E: Each one to itself.
Silence.
V: Rather they whisper.
E: They rustle.
V: They murmur.
E: The rustle.
Silence.
V: What do they say?
E: They talk about their lives.
V: To have lived is not enough for them.
E: They have to talk about it.
V: To be dead is not enough for them.
E: It is not sufficient.
Silence.
V: They make a noise like feathers.
E: Like leaves.
V: Like ashes.
E: Like leaves.
Long silence.
V: Say something!
One of the questions which must be answered is why the bums are suffering in the first place. This can only be answered through the concept of original sin. To be born is to be a sinner, and thus man is condemned to suffer.
Failing to repent, they sit and wait for Godot to come and save them. In the meantime they contemplate suicide as another way of escaping their hopelessness. Estragon wants them to hang themselves from the tree, but both he and Vladimir find it would be too risky. This apathy, which is a result of their age, leads them to remember a time when Estragon almost succeeded in killing himself:
E: Do you remember the day I threw myself into the Rhone?
V: We were grape harvesting.
E: You fished me out.
V: That's all dead and buried.
E: My clothes dried in the sun.
V: There's no good harking back on that. Come on.
Beckett is believed to have said that the name Godot comes from the French "godillot" meaning a military boot. Beckett fought in the war and so spending long periods of time waiting for messages to arrive would have been commonplace for him. The more common interpretation that it might mean "God" is almost certainly wrong. Beckett apparently stated that if he had meant "God," he would have written "God".
An interesting interpretation argues that Lucky receives his name because he is lucky in the context of the play. Since most of the play is spent trying to find things to do to pass the time, Lucky is lucky because his actions are determined absolutely by Pozzo. Pozzo on the other hand is unlucky because he not only needs to pass his own time but must find things for Lucky to do.
Political interpretations also abound. Some reviewers hold that the relationship between Pozzo and Lucky is that of a capitalist to his labor. This Marxist interpretation is understandable given that in the second act Pozzo is blind to what is happening around him and Lucky is mute to protest his treatment. The play has also been understood as an allegory for Franco-German relations.
'Waiting for Godot?' A metaphor for COVID-19
We can say that "Godot" in this case might well be the arrival of an effective vaccine but, as in the play, that might prove to be more an illusion of hope than a reality. The obstacles to fielding a vaccine anytime soon necessitate reassessing acceptable and effective interventions to at least slow the rate of transmission.
Without defining specific parallels, the overall effect on the theatre goer is all too close to that felt by one reviewing the evolution of COVID-19 and our responses to it. One parallel that is worth pointing out is the voluminous, often paradoxical, analytical and critical literature published on Becket’s work in attempting to explain its meanings and underlying philosophy such that almost any characterization of the work can be supported. Similarly, with COVID-19 there is a plethora of published reports on every aspect of the disease that allows supporting almost any opinion or policy. One of the hallmarks of Becket’s mature works was a minimalist approach. Likewise, I plan to use this approach in presenting a review of where we are with various aspects of COVID-19, and, more importantly, how we can no longer afford to await the arrival of Godot.
Another variable that we need to look at is testing, both its accuracy and the resulting ratio of true to total positives. The accuracy is dependent on a tests sensitivity and specificity which can only be estimated for COVID-19 as there is no true gold standard to measure them against given that we are dealing with a new disease. A further complication is that there are well over 50 different tests being used across multiple testing and reporting protocols with varying degrees of accuracy. This is not to negate in any way the great importance of testing in the diagnosis, understanding and control of COVID-19, but to underscore that it is not perfect and may well contribute to the flawed value of case reports as an indicator of the health impacts of the pandemic.
A final consideration demonstrating the irrationality of using positive tests as a yardstick for measuring the health impact of COVID-19 is the dramatic shift in the mean age of test positives from several months ago to the present time. One constant that has been evident through the course of this pandemic is that over 80 percent of fatal outcomes occur in those over 65.
The above discourse is not intended to diminish the seriousness of COVID-19 for those afflicted with it. Clinically it can be a devastating and too often lethal malady with profound impacts that affect patients, loved ones and the health systems caring for them. However, and most unfortunately, COVID-19 has become as much a divisive political issue as a medical one making it difficult for individuals to identify accurate information from amongst conflicting opinions and advice. The tool that has been weaponized in these debates is statistics and it is interesting how a common set of data can be used to support opposing arguments and conclusions. Another victim of this politicization is sound and effective health communication that has unfortunately become the province of a biased media which has nurtured an all too effective campaign of fear. This fear has permeated our population and the discussion above is meant to provide a more realistic assessment of the real risk of serious illness from COVID-19 so that individuals can make more informed choices as to acceptable risk and authorities can better justify interventions and mandates. This, of course, is already beginning to happen as evidenced by younger individuals being more willing to congregate while, overall, the older age group rightly continues to adhere to sound social distancing practices. We could at this point discuss those practices and the current controversies such as with the use of face coverings but, these issues are receiving more than enough attention elsewhere and would be simply repetitive here. However, there is one raging controversy that demands our attention and that is concerning our school aged children.
Conclusion:
From the beginning of our engagement with COVID-19, one consistent analogy used to define our interaction has been that we are at war with the virus. in many ways we have also been at war with ourselves The fact that this harm is inflicted on those virtually immune to serious medical outcomes secondary to COVID-19 is a self-inflicted tragedy. But The pandemic, on the one hand, has transformed our familiar reality and on the other hand, gave us enough time to procrastinate about our existence and the meaning of life.THIS pandemic has left us with no choice but to wait it out. We are waiting from our hospitals, our houses, our apartments, our vehicles, our rooms, and our verandahs. This waiting to get rid of an almost invisible enemy is surreal but real, absurd but actual. Neither have we known how long we have to wait, nor exactly what we're waiting for.
Refferences:
Characters
12927
Words
2221
Sentences
152
Paragraphs
79
No comments:
Post a Comment