Okay, here it is...
We have started reading "Waiting for Godot" and we've talked a bit about absurdism in class. I would like you to consider the meaning of absurdism as it relates to "Hamlet" and "Waiting for Godot" and create a connection between the two plays based on absurdism.
Please write a good, solid single paragraph stating the connection you've made between absurdism, "Hamlet" and "Waiting for Godot."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
35 comments:
Absurdism is a theory which describes life as meaningless. In other words, it is an idea that the universe is without meaning or rational order that human beings, in attempting to find a sense of order, conflict with it. We saw this idea being portrayed in Hamlet at some places, whereas “Waiting for Godot” is a complete absurdist play. Hamlet showed some signs of Absurdism when he makes the famous speech of ‘to be or not to be’ and also when he explains his logic of how everything changes into mud after death, it doesn’t matter if it is Alexander or Caesar. Everything in life seems meaningless to him after the tragedy that happened with him. Sometimes he just doesn’t make sense in his speech. He too, like Vladimir and Estragon, was incapable of turning his decisions into actions. For example, Hamlet decides to kill Claudius but is never able to do it until end. Similarly, Vladimir and Estragon decide not to come to that place again, but they always come back and wait for ‘Godot’. These points establish the relationship between ‘Hamlet’ and ‘Waiting for Godot’ on the basis of Absurdism.
The hardest part about drawing an absurdest connection between "Waiting for Godot" and "Hamlet" is the fact that "Hamlet" was written three or four centuries before Absurdism was even thought of. However there are connections, like the language used. In all absurdest writing, the words mean nothing and in "Hamlet" the titular character fakes insanity for a bit and whenever he does the words mean nothing. Another connection is time. In "Waiting for Godot" when you get to the second act, the time changes to the next day, but the scenery suggest months. In "Hamlet" time also changes, but you don't know it because the time is never listed. This is to show that, like in "Waiting for Godot", time means nothing and is irrevlent. Therefore there are absurdist connections between "Waiting for Godot" and "Hamlet" but they are hard to draw.
There are two connections that I have made between ‘Hamlet’ and ‘Waiting for Godot’. Firstly, absurd plays often feature paired characters that depend on each other, but they can switch roles. In ‘Waiting for Godot’, Vladamir and Estragon are the two main characters, but one is always more dominant than the other. The two can represent id and ego, the id is represented by Estragon because he is hungry and cares about physical things. Whereas Vladamir is the ego because he is more conscious about what’s going on. But the roles change and make both plays absurd. In ‘Hamlet’, there are two sides within Hamlet; firstly, the id that wants to seek revenge for his fathers murder and secondly the ego (or sometimes the superego) that refrains him from doing evil acts and wants solid evidence before doing any kind of sin. In ‘Hamlet’, the ego part is dominant most of the time. The other connection I made between ‘Hamlet’ and ‘Waiting for Godot’ is the fact that although they are written in different time periods, there is absurdity in their speech. For example, when Lucky gives his long talk, there is no meaning at all in it. Similarly, Hamlet gives a lot of soliloquies that are too lengthy for its meaning. Also, what is said contradicts what is going to happen. For example, Vladamir and Estragon say lets go, and they don’t go anywhere. In ‘Hamlet’, Hamlet decides on killing Claudius, but when he approaches him from the behind, he says he’s praying and decides not to kill him. These are the connections I see between ‘Hamlet’, ‘Waiting for Godot’ and absurdism.
By definition, absurdism is a philosophy that states that there is no meaning in the universe, and that any attempts to find that meaning will fail, since no such meaning exists. In “Waiting for Godot”, Vladimir and Estragon are waiting for Godot throughout the whole play. Waiting for him gives them purpose and meaning to their lives, which is something everyone seeks. Unlike the play “Hamlet”, “Waiting for Godot” is a completely absurdist play. There is almost no character development, the only target they have in their lives is to get to the point when they finally meet Godot. Similarly in Hamlet, he dedicated his life to getting revenge for his father by killing Claudius. Additionally, in both plays main characters refuse to take action. In “Waiting for Godot”, Vladimir and Estragon wait for Godot to come to them, instead of taking their lives in their own hands and following the boy to the place where he lives. In Hamlet, instead of taking action he refrains from killing Claudius until the very last moment, causing death and suffering to people close to him. These are the connections related to absurdism I see between “Hamlet” and “Waiting for Godot”.
Absurdism is a theory which suggests a lack of purpose, meaning, and sense. It’s presence in both “Hamlet” and “Waiting for Godot” is strong, though "Hamlet" only has sporadic doses of such. Both plays, however, continue the theme of absurdism through various ideas. In “Waiting for Godot” there is no emphasis placed on the time, as Vladimir and Estragon carry on as though three days is no more than three hours. The changing of a season is explored as a mere second and there is no attention placed on the severe wait these characters have endured. In “Hamlet” we see this same thought, as Hamlet flirts with the concept of revenge and dances around the idea for what seems like days, though in reality it is months. There is significant absurdism in Hamlet’s speech “To be or not to be”, which discusses the logic of death and suicide. Similarly, Vladimir and Estragon toy with this choice of life or death and follow suit with Hamlet’s choice of life. This shows that both plays capture the essence of indecision as all characters opt to put off such a significant decision. Beyond these instances come many more specifics of indecision as Hamlet cannot decide to seek revenge, and Vladimir and Estragon struggle to execute their next move. The final point in which absurdism touches both plays is through speech. There is great contradiction in what is said and what is done, showing a lack of sense and accountability within their speeches. In “Waiting for Godot” their suggested desire to stop waiting is contradicted by continuous waiting, and Hamlet’s suggested desire to kill is opposed by no immediate action.
Absurdism causes the audience to reflect what he or she has just been exposed to from the entertaining material such as pondering why an event has just happened or why would it happen. The Shakespearean play, “Hamlet” and a play written by Samuel Beckett, “Waiting for Godot”, both demonstrates Absurdism. For example, in “Hamlet”¸ religion is important, however, hamlet and other characters have killed many others regardless of their strong beliefs and fear of God. In “Waiting for Godot”, Vladimir had the characteristic of knowing the bible well and Estragon was passive about religious beliefs, however, as the play continues, the rolls were switched. Thus, the two plays both demonstrate absurdism of the forgetfulness and mockery of religion. Another example in “Hamlet” is the scene when the two clowns were questioning about Ophelia’s death, whether she had fell in the river or had she committed suicide herself, yet the clowns had made humor about Ophelia’s death. This causes the audience to question why the clowns would make humor about someone’s death as well as how inappropriate it is to do so. To conclude, “Hamlet” and “Waiting For Godot” both demonstrated absurdism.
Absurdism is a philosophy which states that the human life exists in a meaningless and irrational universe and any attempt of trying to understand it will bring humans in conflict with the universe. There are traits of absurdism in both "Waiting for Godot" and "Hamlet". Even though "Hamlet" was written centuries before the term was coined, the play has several parts that depict absurd situations. The main example would be Hamlet's inability to project his thoughts and plans into real life. He wants to avenge his father's death by killing Claudius and he plans it very carefully to find the right moment to do it. However, two months pass and he is still not ready to do it. He realizes his prolonged hesitation when he compares himself to the Player and to Laertes, but all he does is make some ridiculously long speeches and complain about his existence in this world. In comparison, "Waiting for Godot" takes a quite different approach on absurdism. In fact, the whole play is a demonstration of the absurdist philosophy. There are several scenes and characters however that relate to "Hamlet." Vladimir and Estragon are the main characters in the play. Their whole existence can be described as absurd or ridiculous and the first thing that proves it is that they keep changing their names and personalities between them. Just like Hamlet, they want to do something "Let's go", "We're waiting for Godot", but nothing seems to change. They don't go, Godot doesn't come. They lose track of time and begin to question their existence just as Hamlet does. It doesn't matter to them anymore if they are alive or dead. In conclusion, despite taking different approaches on absurdism, "Hamlet" and "Waiting for Godot" still have a similar way of depicting several absurd situations.
In both Samuel Beckett's "Waiting for Godot" and William Shakespeare's "Hamlet," time has no meaning to the characters in the plays, a concept seen with absurdism. Vladimir and Estragon have been waiting for Godot who has not yet arrived. They have forgotten their past but know that the present has been repeated before, an example being when the boy, a servant of Godot, finds them. This boy seems familiar to Vladimir and Estragon but it his older brother they are remembering. Their life is a daily cycle of waiting for Godot, therefore, time has no meaning because it will not affect when or if this person will arrive. In the Shakespearean play, Hamlet is upset due to the hasty marriage of his mother, Gertrude, and uncle, King Claudius, after his father's death; he believes that his mother should not be able to love so quickly after she was mourning for her husband. Before the players' play begins, Hamlet states to Ophelia how happy his mother appears after his father death two hours ago. She replies that it has been two months and Hamlet says, "So long?" He is still grieving over the loss and the marriage because though time has passed, it does not affect one's emotions. After the ghost of Hamlet Sr. visits and asks Hamlet to seek revenge for his murder, he is still undecided whether to follow this advice once again, two months later. The more Hamlet contemplates the idea, the more he procrastinates and as a result loses touch with reality, which becomes his downfall. To Hamlet, it does not matter how long it takes to make the decision but rather if his choice is correct. Furthering this point is when Hamlet says, "'By and by' is easily said" after Polonius requests that he visits Gertrude. Hamlet implies that time can be interpreted in many ways and is not concrete since the phrase 'by and by' means sometime in the future. This quotation shows that time does not affect Hamlet with his actions, as he does not rely on time as a reference. Both plays show the absurd concept of time having no importance because it does not influence the decisions or emotions of the characters.
The connection that I have made between “Waiting for Godot” and “Hamlet” is that there is no sense of time. This is seen in both plays as Vladimir and Estragon return to the same place to wait for Godot and no one can remember what happened the day before. Also, night falls almost instantly and Vladimir and Estragon are still left waiting. The tree that is present in “Waiting for Godot” is another example of how time is meaningless in this play. One day the tree appears to be barren and then the next day it is covered with leaves. In “Hamlet,” Hamlet is hesitant to commit the murder of Claudius and finds various reasons to put this off. From this, it seems like only a few days have passed but actually it has been much longer. Another connection that can be made between “Hamlet” and “Waiting for Godot” is that the characters of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern and Vladimir and Estragon appear to be two halves of one character. This can be seen in “Waiting for Godot” as Vladimir appears to be the more knowledgeable character when it comes to religion, then eventually the roles switch and we learn that Estragon knows more about religion than Vladimir. In “Hamlet”, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern share the same thoughts as they are able to complete each other’s sentences. The connections that were made between “Waiting for Godot” and “Hamlet” demonstrate the absurd relationship between the two plays.
The term absurdism, takes a differentiating meaning when looked upon in Hamlet and Waiting for Godot. In considering the two plays, what was deemed as absurd in one was not necessarily so in the other. In Hamlet, Ophelia and Gertrude’s abuse by Hamlet is unjustifiable and scorned upon in our current society. However, when reading Hamlet, the reader places him/herself in the setting of the play and accepts the mentality of the characters as if they were one’s own. So in first perception of this mistreatment, the reader does not think it is absurd because Hamlet and the society within the play does not think it is. It is only evident when the reader looks back at the text and compares it to the present, that he/she realizes the absurdity in the content. On the contrary, in Waiting for Godot, Lucky’s slave-like treatment and his acceptation of it was taken as absurd from the first encounter. This was because the characters, Vladimir and Estragon, thought it was absurd, hence the reader falls to think the same. It is not so much the meaning of absurdity that matters, it is of the social perception of what is and what is not absurd.
Absurdism defines the human situation as being meaningless. In applying this concept to content studied in class, absurdism is displayed in both the plays Hamlet, by William Shakespeare, and Waiting for Godot, by Samuel Beckett, in similar fashion. First, absurdism is displayed in both plays through the contradiction in speech. In the play of Hamlet, Hamlet vowed to avenge his father’s death for over two months, but he failed to do so. A lot like this scenario, the same kind of contradiction is present in the play Waiting for Godot. This can be seen when Vladimir and Estragon suggested committing suicide by hanging themselves but they do not follow through with it. Overall, these characters say things that end up being meaningless to some extent. With that being said, the concept of id versus ego arises. This concept deals with the functions of the mind in which the id portion is uncoordinated and acts on impulse as where the ego portion is organized and realistic. This is easily compared to ones conscience. In Hamlet, this is a constantly recurring concept by observing how his decision making process is a constant battle within himself. For example, his impulsive state of mind wants to kill Claudius right away but his ego driven state of mind gives reason to do otherwise. Similarly in Waiting for Godot, the concept of id versus ego is also present. One example is where Estragon suggests leaving from where they wait while Vladimir reminds him that they cannot leave because they are waiting for Godot. Evidently Estragon is id, the character that speaks on impulse, and Vladimir is ego, the character with reasoning. This relates to absurdism because in both cases there is another sense of contradiction in which one characters action is negated by either a second, more reasonable character, or by one characters inner conscience alone. In turn, the suggestion or the thought of the action becomes of little to no significance. The perception of absurdism is still hard to grasp for many people, but the connections made between these two plays provide a better understanding for the audience.
Absurdism is a philosophy which tells us that humans exist in a meaningless world, and it is made to confuse the human mind. The connections that I have found between “Hamlet”, “Waiting for Godot” and Absurdism is; first off in both plays there are a pair of characters whom depend on each other, with one being more dominant than the other. Starting off with “Waiting for Godot”, the two main characters are Vladamir and Estragon which is a very odd pair. Vladamir and Estragon are two different people with two different personalities that keep on jumping from one character to the other character this is shown to create absurdum throughout this play. Secondly in “Hamlet”, the two characters which I believe play a role in absurdisim are Rosencrantz and Guildenstern they both have their own personalities, but keep switching from one person to another person. In both plays there is one pair who is more dominant then another. These plays are both related to Absurdism by confusing the mind of the audience. Although Absurdism describes life as “meaningless” it is still suppose to confuse the human mind and to make us think. Another connection that I made throughout “Waiting for Godot” and “Hamlet”, which involved Absurdism was; in “Hamlet”, Hamlet is ready to kill his uncle for murdering his father, yet he takes his time and something keeps stopping him. The same goes towards “Waiting for Godot”, because Vladamir and Estragon are waiting for Godot, and it is very repetitive. This shows a connection between the two plays, by either waiting to do something or waiting for something, but not showing. This shows us a connection to Absurdism because it confuses the audience by making us wonder if they really do want to do what they are about to, or if they just say it and forget about it.
A connection between the two plays is the lack of concern for death. Hamlet was continually speaking passively about death with debating to commit suicide and was obviously not thoughtful about it in killing four other people. Even with much procrastination and ‘said’ protest of being damned to hell, he unmistakably showed he wasn’t afraid of death because his thoughts were set on vengeance. Vladimir and Estragon were very passive about death as they spoke lightly about bringing rope to hang themselves. They acted like it was normal and like it was just a picnic at the park. With this idea, altogether the passiveness of death is very absurd to people nowadays. We would do anything to live longer and not die. A normal functioning human being would actually be afraid to die. To us it is absurd because we all want to live. We all have something we believe in and we’d rather stay in this world than find out sometime bad in the next. But to Hamlet, his perspective was that if he died he would go to hell if he killed someone. But then again he may go to heaven. To Estragon and Vladimir, they had had enough of waiting and searching that killing themselves would be a way to pass time. Their perspective was that the afterlife must be better than where they are at now. So to the characters in both plays, their passivity about death may not be absurd because their perspective is different than ours. When your perspective in life is shaped, it ultimately shapes the way you live. In simpler terms, Absurdity is in the eye of the beholder.
The play, Waiting for Godot, is an excellent example of absurdism as it depicts no plot, no story and where nothing is accomplished. However, the play, Hamlet, illustrates a story with a plot, essence and meaning. Nevertheless these two plays illustrate very similar characteristics that define the examples of an absurdist drama. In both plays, the use of language (words) is extremely powerful. The script for Waiting for Godot was simply a play on words. The actors confused each other, misunderstood each other and responded to questions with no wisdom or intellect. However this lacking of common sense is the author’s way explaining the truth about life. Similarly, words and language in some parts of Hamlet is empty and it lacks the ability to make sense but when looking at it in depth, there is logic. The script of madness for both Hamlet and Ophelia, portray a true example of an absurdist play because by absolutely coming to no conclusion, or by making no logic, the dialogue portrays the truth about life and also about certain characters in the play. Hamlet’s act of madness was done to accomplish his goal however his words during his act were very vague and imprecise. When Hamlet calls Polonius a ‘Fish Monger’ it was not meant to make sense because Polonius did not sell fish, as the name implied. Also, a fishmonger is an honest profession who is reliable. However when trying to understand this dialogue, one comprehends that Hamlet wishes Polonius was an honest human being who was upfront, real and trustworthy. Likewise, Ophelia’s madness held a truth, which would not have been let out if she were in her right state of mind. Her dialogues were not coherent, nor were they valid since the audience had to think about what was really being said. However, her songs told a truth about her life and the flowers held meaning, which explained the cause of her madness.
Absurdism is evident in both “Hamlet” and “Waiting for Godot”, yet it is more emphasized in the latter. Several ideas are shared among the two plays which present an overall absurdist nature. The theme of death and how the main characters perceive it is common between the plays. Hamlet is obsessed with the idea of death, which is clearly shown with the famous quote “To be or not to be…” and in the scene with him holding Yorrick’s skull. Numerous times, he is contemplating suicide. This is also shown in “Waiting for Godot” as Vladimir and Estragon also consider the idea as they try hanging themselves from a tree. The idea of suicide is taken lightly by all three characters which suggest an absurdist environment. In addition, the language used within both plays brings about an absurd impression. Things are said, but are not meant, and therefore are not done. Hamlet says he will take revenge but does not take any immediate action. Vladimir and Estragon say that they will stop waiting, and immediately continue to wait for Godot. Language is of no real meaning here. This also leads to the frequent indecision of all characters. Hamlet is always thinking twice before actually killing Claudius, and Vladimir and Estragon are always thinking about doing something and always end up in the same position where they started with nothing being accomplished. These ideas link the absurd concepts between the two plays.
Even though “Hamlet” is not an absurdist play like “Waiting for Godot”, it still has a hint of absurdism, and connections can be made between those two plays. In both plays the language that is used did not necessarily make sense. In “Hamlet”, when Hamlet acts mad, he always said meaningless words that did not make any sense. Similarly in “Waiting for Godot”, Vladimir and Estragon were not talking about anything important, and many times the reader would be lost as to what they are saying or trying to do. In both plays there are two characters that are always together, they are treated the same way, and tend to switch roles during the play. In “Hamlet” those two characters are Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, and we see that they are both treated equally when Claudius and Gertrude greet them: “Thanks Rosencrantz, and gentle Guildenstern” (King, ActII, Scene II); “Thanks Guildenstern, and gentle Rosencrantz…” (Queen, Act II, Scene II). In Waiting for Godot those two characters are presented by Vladimir and Estragon. At the beginning of the play, we get the sense that Vladimir is the leader, and Estragon is the follower. After some time in the play, those roles switch between the characters, and we get the sense that Estragon is the leader and Vladimir is the follower. The other factor that creates absurdism in both plays is the indecisiveness and doubtfulness of the characters in both plays. In “Hamlet”, Hamlet cannot decide when to get revenge for his father. He thinks too much, but he cannot decide when to take action. Also, when he sees the ghost he does not know whether the ghost is a demon or if it is his father’s actual ghost. In “Waiting for Godot”, Vladimir and Estragon discuss hanging themselves, but they do not actually do it, they cannot decide how to organize themselves so they could hang themselves. Time in these two plays is not an important factor. In “Waiting for Godot” Vladimir and Estragon have no sense of time and they cannot recall what they did the day before. They wait for Godot for a long time, and waste time, and they seem to not care. Similarly in “Hamlet”, Hamlet wastes his time, and he procrastinates too much. These are the factors present in both plays, which create absurdism.
A number of connections can be made between the absurdism found in “Hamlet” and “Waiting for Godot”. In “Waiting for Godot”, Vladimir and Estragon spend all their time waiting for “Godot” beside a tree. They are incapable of making simple decisions such as whether or not they should just leave. Similarly, Hamlet waits until the end of the play to take action and get his revenge on Claudius. Hamlet had the opportunity of killing Claudius earlier in play when he snuck up on Claudius during his prayer; however his indecisiveness caused him to wait until the end of the play. Absurdism states that language for the sake of language is useless. Hamlet pretends to be mad by making no sense and saying very unusual things. When Hamlet is talking to Polonius, he calls him a fishmonger, even though he knows who he actually is, which makes Polonius think he’s crazy. In Vladimir and Estragon’s case, they never make any sense when they talk to each other. They steal each others lines and sound like one character. This makes it very difficult to understand them since the reader becomes confused. Life is portrayed as meaningless and random in these absurdist plays. Vladimir and Estragon consider suicide in the end of the play, when they talk about hanging themselves off the tree. Hamlet is also seen contemplating suicide during his famous “To be or not to be” speech. It is absurd to see people talking about death and suicide the way it was portrayed in the two plays since nobody is completely certain what comes after it. These are the many connections that can be made with relation to absurdism as depicted in the two plays.
The play, Waiting for Godot, is an excellent example of absurdism as we know that the condition of the man is waiting, and we are in the need for some kind of salvation though, we know it will never come. It is a great example of an absurdist play because there is no official timing, story and we also get to no conclusions. In “hamlet” the main character which is hamlet, he is obsessed over death and life means nothing to him. He sees examples of thousands of people fighting over a small piece of land which is again an evidence of absurdist play. In “Waiting for Godot” Vladimir and Estragon also talk to each other about hanging themselves from a tree. The language used within both plays is directly connected to an absurdist drama. People say things and they never get them done. Hamlet says he will take revenge but does not take any immediate action. He keeps saying to himself that he will kill Claudius and has to take revenge but, he never does it. Vladimir and Estragon say that they will stop waiting, and immediately continue to wait for Godot. All the characters in both plays are indecisive. In Waiting For Godot the play starts at the same position and ends up being in the same position. We never get to see any conclusion in it. The both plays are very great examples of absurdist play.
The plays “Waiting for Godot” and “Hamlet” both exhibit various characteristics of absurdism and one of the biggest connections between the two plays and absurdism, I believe, is the idea that change is only an illusion. The play, “Waiting for Godot”, constantly expresses this idea, where the entire play consists of the two main characters, Vladimir and Estragon, continually doing the same thing everyday which is waiting for Godot. Seasons pass by in the play, time goes on, and people come and go, but nothing has really changed, for Vladimir and Estragon are still in the same place, still doing the same thing, still waiting for the same person. No change occurs even when something seems to have changed such as the seasons, reinforcing the notion that change is only an illusion. In the play “Hamlet”, Hamlet starts off as a lonely, depressed character, and by the end, even when he has gotten his revenge, the fact that he is still lonely and depressed has not changed. He also starts off as a seemingly crazy, indecisive person and he remains that way despite the obstacles and events that come his way, such as finding out that his uncle is a murderer. Claudius, who seems to be a very active character in the play, does not change at all either. He murders Hamlet Sr. in order to marry Gertrude and become king, pretends innocence and when found out by Hamlet, plots to have him killed in order to remain king. He even allows Gertrude to die. Different events seem to occur, and yet they are essentially the same. In order to fulfill his desires and protect himself, Claudius plans, he lies and he kills. This does not change, his actions or mentality of putting himself first, despite the changes that seem to occur in the play. Therefore it is evident that in both these plays, “Waiting for Godot” and “Hamlet”, the idea that change is just an illusion is present, showing how absurdism connects to both plays and each other.
Within Waiting for Godot and Hamlet, the philosophy of absurdism is most notable in the examination of the psychological thought processes of the characters, the extensions of time throughout the movement of the plots, and the inevitable downfall of the characters in their ongoing pursuits for universal meaning. The overall progressions of both plays are initially simplistic in nature, but are augmented by the input of the characters’ psychological complications of indecision and uncertainty, both of which inevitably lead to vagueness and irresolution. Hamlet prevents his own progress by continually analyzing each of his actions in relation to those of the people around him; he fabricates excuses in order to hinder himself from attaining his goals, setting off to procure sufficient evidence of the validity of his father’s words, skirting around the issue, and unnecessarily dwelling upon proving (solely to himself) Claudius’ involvement in the murder. He relies upon his religious ideals to prolong the murder of Claudius, simply to put off the course of action he knows he must take, because he himself is unwilling to assume responsibility in the execution of the task. The entire central portion of the play is drawn out, vague, and unresolved because of Hamlet’s obsessive quest for self-reassurance. Similarly, Vladimir and Estragon delve into seemingly meaningless and arbitrary discussions that are fueled by their indecisiveness and uncertainty. Their disagreements invoke their lengthy conversations, and each one’s need to dwell upon every idea imposed by the other causes an extension of the plot, where the time spent conversing about the validity of Godot, the concept of religion, and the perpetual repetition of their lives prolongs the overall progression of the play. These three characters - Hamlet, Vladimir, and Estragon - are far too involved in their psychological states that they lose touch with reality, and the concept of time thereby loses its value to them. Hamlet is convinced of the frailties of mankind and struggles to generate a sense of identity; he endeavours to determine his responsibility as both a prince and a son, all while fulfilling his father’s entreaty for vengeance. Similarly, the actions and thoughts of Vladimir and Estragon are dictated by their constant efforts to encounter Godot; they are spurned by the anticipation of the meeting and live their days in repetition, for fear that he might choose to appear at the moment they decide to cease their waiting. The psychological forces that drive Hamlet to derive sense out of his existence and Vladimir and Estragon to continually linger in self-reassurance of the arrival of Godot express the ways in which these characters attempt to find meaning in the universe and ultimately fail; the absurdity exists in this ongoing failure and mankind’s obliviousness to it.
Absurdism is a philosophy that was said to have started during the 19th century which states that the universe is irrational and meaningless. Hamlet and Waiting for Godot were written more than three centuries apart, however, they both do have connections with absurdism. One relation that Waiting for Godot has with Hamlet is that the characters lack the knowledge of time. For instance, Hamlet, the main character of Hamlet, assigned himself with a task to get revenge for his father. Although he has more than enough proof that Claudius killed his father, he still decides to prolong his death sentence due to reasons such as religion, however, it is ironic and absurdist that Hamlet committed a sin which would take him to hell but still decides to wait until his mother died and before he dies by poison and that is when he realized that his time limit is almost over and must do what is right. In waiting for Godot, the two main characters, Vladimir and Estragon, are asked to wait for a man named Godot. They have been waiting for long time, beside a tree, that they don’t even remember how long they have waited. It is stated that one day the tree beside looks differently the next day, however, trees do not change their appearance overnight to adjust to a different season. This fact means that the characters have lost their total sense of time, even until the end of the book and it is absurdist because their life has no meaning and is being wasted by someone else or it could have just been awful joke by someone who told them to wait for a nonexistent person considering the boy that talked to main characters was hired to joke around with them.
The theatre of the absurd is viewed as a place where man has no purpose or is simply “out of key”; the use of language and indecisiveness of characters connects the plays “Hamlet” and “Waiting for Godot” and emphasizes them as absurd dramas. Although written in different eras, the language as means of communication plays a very important role in both plays. In Beckett's “Waiting for Godot”, Vladimir and Estragon have arbitrary conversations while waiting for Godot and question their own existence. They use blunt and authentic language when talking to one another throughout the play and wish to hang themselves. Similarly, in Shakespeare’s “Hamlet”, Hamlet also uses blunt language and often has useless conversations with other characters. For example, when mocking Polonius he calls him a fish monker and when answering Claudius’ question about Polonuis' dead body, he gives him a puzzling answer. Evidently he also questions his own existence through his speech “to be or not to be” where he is uncertain about his existence. Not only is the use of language absurd in both plays, but it is also the indecisiveness and procrastination of the characters which expresses them as absurd beings. Vladimir and Estragon wait for Godot despite the fact that they are unsure about Godot existence, also whenever they decide to hang themselves or move away from a place, they stay idle. Likewise, Hamlet procrastinates to seek revenge, and takes illogical decisions to delay his action. Thus, Even though both of the plays vary greatly due to their historical and social context as they were written in different eras (one in the era of absurdism and extentialism and the other in Elizabethan times) one can still connect them using absurdist concepts of language and the indecisiveness of characters.
In the plays “Hamlet” by William Shakespeare and “Waiting for Godot” by Samuel Beckett, the absurdity of human existence is emphasized through repetitiousness in the plot, meaningless exchange of dialogue, and the theme of uncertainty in religion.
In absurdist plays, there is no concept of time, the plot keeps repeating and lacks development. We see this when Hamlet keeps repeating his thoughts of wanting to kill Claudius but does not take any action until later on in the play. Similar repetition of plot is seen when Vladimir and Estragon keep coming back to the same place every day to wait for Godot. Another absurdist concept present in both the plays is the insignificance and arbitrariness of dialogue. We see the insignificance when the play ‘mousetrap’ is about to start and Hamlet asks Polonius if he has acted in plays and what role he has played. This conversation holds no significance and can be defined as meaningless exchange of words. Similarly in “Waiting for Godot”, Vladimir and Estragon also question the boy asking him questions such as where he lives and what he does, which is also insignificant. Furthermore, Shakespeare and Beckett include the theme of uncertainty in religion in their plays in order to make the audience uncomfortable, forcing them to think. We see this in “Hamlet” when the two clowns are discussing whether Ophelia should get a Christian burial or not. We also see this uncertainty when Hamlet sees the ghost and does not know whether to believe it or not. Similarly in “Waiting for Godot”, Vladimir talks about the two thieves in the Gospels, and wonders why one version of the story is considered more accurate than the others and which one to believe. Through repeating the plot, portraying language as confusing and insignificant, and using the theme of uncertainty in religion, both authors successfully incorporate absurdist concepts in their plays.
In both Samuel Beckett's "Waiting for Godot" and William Shakespeare's “Hamlet”, words become meaningless exchanges. In Hamlet, the character of mad Hamlet exchanges words with no meanings to them. An example being, “Polonius: Do you know me, my lord?” “Hamlet: Excellent well; you are a fishmonger”, that doesn’t make sense to the audience since there was no place in the play where Polonius was introduced as a fishmonger. By having such a conversation in the play seems to confuse the audience where it leads to exchange of words with no meanings to them, a concept seen in absurdism. In waiting for Godot, meaningless language is used through out the play, making no sense. Estragon and Vladimir exchanges words to communicate the simplest things with very confusing words creating comedy and absurdism in the play. Estragon: What did we do yesterday? Vladimir: What did we do yesterday? Estragon: Yes Vladimir: Why…” The use of nonsense language leads to confusion, making no sense to the audience. This kind of language is mainly from absurd theatres and is applied to both plays making them absurd. Furthermore, the importance of objects more than words in communicating is emphasized in both plays. In Hamlet, Hamlet talking to Yorik’s skull is a significant event where the importance of the object is primary. Hamlet’s sad and depressing ideas about death’s unavoidability and the breakdown of the body are gathered and presented with the symbolization of Yorik’s skull. The use of such language with objects to communicate, has given more effectiveness to the entire speech than it would have had with just words. In waiting for Godot, the tree with no leaves at the beginning of the play was full of leaves closer to the end of the play. At the beginning (Act I), “Vladimir: He said by the tree. (They look at the tree.) Do you see any others? Estragon: What is it? Vladimir: I don't know. A willow. Estragon: Where are the leaves? Vladimir: It must be dead.” In act II; “Vladimir: Look at it. They look at the tree. Estragon: I see nothing. Vladimir: But yesterday evening it was all black and bare. And now it's covered with leaves. Estragon: Leaves? Vladimir: In a single night. Estragon: It must be the Spring.” This is significant because it gives importance to the time period where it is not mentioned in the play by words. The use of objects as a language to communicate with the audience is found in both plays creating absurdism.
Ab-surd- the quality or condition of existing in a meaningless and irrational world.
From the plays Hamlet and Waiting for Godot one can identify the similar absurdities of a world in which two men merge into one entity, life is a trifling affair, and all conventions and logistics of language are lost. In Hamlet, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern have never been present apart from each other. They are like the two sides of a coin, interchangeable in character and in their respective roles in the play despite being two different people. Similarly, in Waiting for Godot, Vladimir and Estragon frequently ponder what life would be like apart from each other, hinting to the audience that there has never been such a time. The more the reader learns of the two separate characters, the more they seem incomplete without each other. Another link created between the two plays forms from the main characters’ perceptions of life and subsequently, death. As one can see in Waiting for Godot, Vladimir and Estragon both try to hang themselves on a tree because they cannot seem to find anything better to do. To them life seems so worthless and inane that they can careless about it. This is very apparent in Hamlet’s character as well, as his obsession with death is manifested in a number of speeches, for example, his “To be or not to be” speech where he questions the meaning of life and voices the temptations of death, and symbols in the play such as Yorrick’s skull. The final connection that can be made between the two plays is the use and loss of logical language. In Hamlet, there are various times when meaningless words spewed by Hamlet and Ophelia signified insanity or, more importantly, the insight that only the insane possess. Hamlet also thinks and says many things he does not mean, showing how words often disguise, or fail to express the truth. In Waiting for Godot, the loss of conventional language is very much apparent during Vladimir and Estragon’s conversation with the boy. Also, one can see how words are of no importance without actions to follow them through; Vladimir and Estragon, say they want to leave their place but the do not make any effort to leave. Of many other similar absurdities present, these are the three that I believe were the most important between Hamlet and Waiting for Godot.
The concept of absurdism defines the universe non-existing and our existence to be meaningless . The idea that conflict rises whenever social order is desired is seen present within “Waiting for Godot” and "Hamlet" which created a sense of absurdity since every individual has a different solution to a given issue. Throughout the play “Waiting for Godot” both Vladimir and Estragon were waiting for Godot whom would give them a sense of purpose in their existence. We constantly seek to now our existence and create meaning to our life's yet at the same time this becomes difficult . On the other, within “Hamlet” absurdity plays a crucial role whereby the main character enters into conflict with himself and dedicated his life on revenge . At some points within both plays the protagonist characters refused to take action and were concerned with the outcome. For instance, Vladimir and Estragon remained patient for Godot arrival rather then killing themselves whereas, within Hamlet the main character refrains from killing his uncle until he finds the right moment to cause more pain and sorrow. Overall, from the informed examples within “Hamlet” and “Waiting for Godot” the the philosophy of absurdism is seen present.
Both “Hamlet” and “Waiting for Godot”, the texts read in class, have links to the theme of absurdism, one of which is the absurd language used in both plays. The protagonist, Hamlet, fakes madness in his speech, with his speech becoming progressively more random and void of meaning. Similarly in “Waiting for Godot”, most of the dialogue consists of a series of non- sequiturs as Vladimir and Estragon are left waiting for Godot. In both plays, the main characters try to decipher a purpose to their lives. However, the audience realizes from Vladimir and Estragon’s thoughts and actions that their lives have no meaning demonstrated by their listless lives and passive attitudes.However, Hamlet’s purpose is to kill Claudius to avenge his father. Though he does kill Claudius, he completes the act because he contemplates it so much. Therefore, these plays can both be said to be absurd because the characters do not fulfill their purpose. It is through the analysis of language and character that we can make connections between “Waiting for Godot”, “Hamlet” and the Absurd Theatre.
Absurdism is a theoretical concept of philosophy, which describes life as meaningless and absurd. Hamlet and Waiting for Godot relate in so many way according to that theory. For example according to absurdism, language is just a vehicle of conventionalized, stereotype, meaningless exchanges, meaning that language is not sufficient to describe human feelings or emotions. It is a way of communication, which lacks in style, its not being able to penetrate beyond human surface. For example in Waiting for Godot, how at the end of every seen Vladimir and Estragon would say lets go but do not move. In hamlet, his effort of finding the right and strong words that could describe what he really is feeling, when he talks to himself. Words are not important in absurdism but objects and actions are. For example in the play Waiting for Godot, when Pozo needed help and Vladimir was giving a whole speech about how he and Estragon should help him, but never actually got up and act upon it. In play Hamlet, how hamlet keeps on planning a lot but ended up doing nothing at all, no actions even if he does do something, he does it when he knows that he is gong to die in 5 or 10 minutes. Time is another big thing in absurdism. In absurd theatre, time is not important. For example in waiting for Godot, how Vladimir and Estragon were just Waiting for Godot no matter what time it was, and how in hamlet he makes 2 months, 2 days. these are the points that relate Hamlet and Waiting for Godot to eachother according to Absurdism.
Absurdism is a theory, which represents non purpose meaningless theory and it can be unreliable and Waiting for Godot. In the Play Hamlet, most of the occasions they were not sure of what they are doing, particularly Hamlet wants to seek revenge to Claudius , but he was not sure about when he wants to do it and keeps procrastinating it. Meanwhile in waiting for Godot, Estragon and Vladimir were waiting for an unrecognized person called “Godot” and they were not sure about when he will meet them, but they were still waiting for him. Another example is unusual behaviours of characters have been portrayed in both of these plays. In the play Hamlet, Hamlet pretends to be mad and Ophelia becomes mad after her father Polonius was killed by Hamlet. In waiting for Godot , Estragon shows a childish character of a Human being even though he is an old person. In the play Estragon always used to question Vladimir, he always used to seek protection with Vladimir such as a kid usually does and he is always hungry and not caring about what Vladimir says. These points depict me the theory of Absurdism in Hamlet and waiting for Godot.
The texts “Waiting for Godot” by Samuel Beckett and “Hamlet” by William Shakespeare both portray an absurdist view within their respective plots. While explored further in “Waiting for Godot”, the absurdist characteristics of irrational speech, the absence of change, and the frequent contemplation of suicide. As absurdisim is founded on the principle that human existence is meaningless, it follows that speech too lacks substance. Hamlet manipulates speech in his madness ploy, thus his conversations, while lengthy; do not convey a clear important thought. Similarly, the cast of “Waiting for Godot” match their in-action with pointless conversation, conveying that human life does not offer a clear, significant thought worth communicating. Additionally, this devoid is mirrored in the illusion of change, enhanced by the absence of action and time. Inertia in “Hamlet” forces Hamlet to succeed in his drawn out goal of murdering Claudius after months of scheming, however, he begins lonely and miserable and dies lonely and miserable. The illusion of change is amplified in “Waiting for Godot”, as there is no plot. Vladimir and Estragon are trapped in a time loop, repeating the same scene in which they wait for Godot. Also, changes in season reflected by the shifting tree have no impact, illustrating that although the seasons have changed, Vladimir and Estragon continue, and will forever continue, to wait for Godot. Moreover, suicide is discussed in both plays. The characters Hamlet and Vladimir and Estragon view suicide lightly, where religion and societal conventions often condemn the act of suicide. This is due to the purpose religion and society attempt to place on human life. As absurdisim contradicts this principle, suicide is viewed simply as another potential decision. Therefore, the absurdist principle that mankind is purposeless manifests itself in meaningless exchanges, the deception of change, and the worthlessness of an individual life in the plays “Waiting for Godot” and “Hamlet”.
“Hamlet” and “Waiting for Godot” might have been written in different time periods, but the differences end there. Both plays exhibit qualities of absurdism (the theory concerning the lack of meaning and purpose in life) and as a result, readers are able to create connections to better understand the absurd nature of the play, particularly in the aspects of drawn-out plots and irrelevance of time, the illogical use of language to convey truth, and the triviality of death. Firstly, the entire plot of “Hamlet” is drawn out due to Hamlet’s indecisiveness to seek revenge for his father’s death. Though he knows that Claudius is guilty of murdering his father, Hamlet continues to make excuses (i.e. not killing Claudius when he was praying) and prove the validity of Claudius’ guilt to himself (i.e. the play performed by the players) before deciding on an appropriate course of action. Similarly, rather than deciding to leave when Godot doesn’t show up, Vladimir and Estragon prolong their stay by engaging in random conversation. The prolonging of their wait coupled with the senseless conversations draws out the meaningless plot. Therefore, the absurd quality of the plots cause the readers to question why the protagonists failed to make decisions that could’ve resulted in a more quick and worthwhile plot. Also, as a result of the drawn out plots, time loses its relevance in the plays. If time was important to them, Hamlet, Estragon, and Vladimir would not have wasted as much time as they did plotting revenge or waiting for a man who wouldn’t show up. Next, the illogical use of language is prominently used in both plays. In “Hamlet”, the illogical use arises from the fact that it is the words of the insane that actually hold truth (i.e. revelations of Gertrude’s infidelity and Hamlet and Ophelia’s sexual relationship during Ophelia’s rants). The logical use of language, shown during Hamlet’s moments of sanity, only further confuses the readers about the state of Hamlet’s mind (in particular, his “To be or not to be” soliloquy). In a similar fashion, the illogical use of language in “Waiting for Godot”, which is blunt and simple, creates the pointlessness seen in Vladimir and Estragon’s conversations. However, this pointlessness conveys a hidden message (or truth) that life itself is pointless, therefore it is only fitting that conversations are as well. The illogical use of language shows that meaning can instead exist in the meaningless. Lastly, the triviality of death emphasizes the protagonists’ views of life. Hamlet questions his existence in his “To be or not to be” soliloquy, is obsessed with death, and contemplates suicide. Vladimir and Estragon regularly talk about hanging themselves. Clearly, the protagonists do not seem to think much of life because life will always end in death, thus conveying the idea that if life will always lose its meaning in the end, is there a true purpose to it? With these connections, the readers will find the absurdism that exists in both “Hamlet” and “Waiting for Godot”. Therefore, the plays convey similar messages of absurdism and the meaningless of life, even though both came from varying social and historical circumstances.
Absurdism is a theory developed in the 1950s based upon the belief that human life is meaningless and that humans serve no specific purpose in this universe. This is a philosophy portrayed effectively in both “Hamlet” and “Waiting for Godot”. The theory of absurdism is bluntly obvious in Beckett’s famous absurdist play “Waiting for Godot” in many different factors, whereas the absurdism is a little harder to recognize in Shakespeare’s “Hamlet”, though it does exist even if it is to a small degree. One similarity connecting absurdism between the two is based upon the theme of death, which signifies the questionings of one’s existence in the universe. In “Waiting for Godot”, Vladimir and Estragon both speak straightforwardly of death and hanging themselves from a tree limb as if there is no crucial importance to their existence on the planet. Similarly in “Hamlet”, one notices the main character question his existence consistently, such as during his renowned ‘to be or not to be’ soliloquy where he contemplates whether continuing life or a simple suicide is the answer to all his problems. This expresses to the reader that Hamlet must not think his life has a purpose, therefore losing nothing by committing the dreadful act of suicide. The language used in both plays also hints at absurdism as though both plays have two distinct styles there are particular parts in either play where the words said are just a meaningless exchange of words. This takes place often in “Waiting for Godot” as Vladimir and Estragon talk repeatedly of similar topics and come to the same decision each time in what is almost like a cyclical pattern. In “Hamlet”, the play of words is not as obvious, yet does exist on Hamlet’s part as he is seen to make many decisions in his elegant form of talking, but takes no action on these words thus making them meaningless to the audience. Finally, the factor of time in both plays also portrays the theory of absurdism in the plays. Both plays have no significant record of time: in “Waiting for Godot”, Vladimir and Estragon are waiting for what could be merely two days for Godot or the reader can even contemplate on whether the seasons have changed; and in “Hamlet”, Hamlet’s plan seems shortlisted as he continues to talk of his actions and ideas but takes no actions to execute his plan, therefore, dragging it on day after day. Time seems to be of no importance in both plays which reflects an absurdist lifestyle. Thus, by considering the factors of language, time, and the theme of death present in both plays, I believe one can clearly understand the links of absurdism that exist between the two plays “Waiting for Godot” and “Hamlet”.
Within, William Shakespeare’s “Hamlet” and Samuel Beckett’s “Waiting for Godot” absurdism can easily be identified one of the themes because it continually reappears within the two plays. The most prevalent examples of absurdism that can be found in both plays are time, death, and language. In the two plays time is of no importance, Hamlet constantly procrastinates the revenge of his father despite months having past by. In the same way, in “Waiting for Godot” months pass by while Vladimir and Estragon still wait for Godot, therefore one can see that time is insignificant and does not play a role in changing the action of characters or the ultimate outcome of the play. Death is also a theme that connects the two plays on a base of absurdism. In each work the viewer notices that the main characters all contemplate death. For instance, in Hamlet’s speaks about suicide in his “To be or not to be” speech and Vladimir and Estragon attempt to hang themselves but fail. The suggestion that life and death is meaningless exemplifies the theme of absurdism. Language, is too, used in both of the plays in the same absurd manner. Although Hamlet talks about killing Claudius he does not until the very end of the play. Likewise, Vladimir and Estragon speak of leaving the spot they are at, however, they remain motionless. As a result one can see that language in both plays is unreliable; this is another important aspect of absurdism. Through the portrayal of time as insignificant, death as meaningless and language as unreliable one can see that both plays exhibit and share the common theme of absurdism.
Absurdism is a philosophy, which states that humanity has failed to create a meaning within the universe. In the early 1950s a group of European playwrights have created a different style for theaters which was aimed to make the audience confused and think at a different way. Absurdism has been clearly shown in the plays we’ve read in class “waiting for godot” by Samuel Beckett, and in “Hamlet” by William Shakespeare. “Waiting for godot” was an absurdist play because of the events that occur from the very beginning. The play “waiting for godot” begun with a discussion between Vladimir and Estragon while they were waiting for a person they did not know, named godot. Samuel Beckett showed absurdism in the play when Vladimir and Estragon where confused of which person was which. On the other hand the Shakespearian play Hamlet has also expressed absurdism in many ways. In many of hamlet’s speeches the audience was confused whether to believe that hamlet is just pretending to be insane or whether he really was insane, he also confused other characters of whether he really was insane or not. Shakespeare also showed us absurdism in Rosencrantz and Guildenstern where the audience never really knew which was which. The best relationship shown in both plays regarding absurdism was time, in the play “Hamlet” hamlet wanted to take revenge for his father’s death and without the audience realizing that it has been months since his father died and hamlet was just waiting to take revenge regardless about time. On the other hand Vladimir and Estragon in “waiting for godot” were going to wait for godot for the rest of their lives regardless about time which showed us absurdism on a larger scale within both plays. Therefore it is safe to say that absurdism was expressed very clearly in both plays we’ve read in class, where we saw how text was meaningless, and the setting of the place was also meaningless within the play.
The concept of absurdism can be a difficult topic to grasp, especially between both “Hamlet” and “Waiting for Godot”. However, several connections can be made to identify the absurdity between the two plays. The theme of indecision and how it connects the main characters is common between the two plays. Hamlet is always contemplating before actually killing Claudius, and Vladimir and Estragon are always thinking of doing something but they never do anything. They always find themselves in the same place they started. Also, the language used within both plays carries with it an absurd view. Things are said, but are never meant, and so they are not done. Hamlet says he will take revenge but he never takes any action. Vladimir and Estragon say that they will stop waiting, and instantly go back to waiting for Godot. So we can see that language is meaningless in the two plays. In addition, the irrelevance of time is a strong connection between the two plays. This is seen in “Waiting for Godot” as Vladimir and Estragon return to the same place to wait for Godot and neither one can remember what happened the day before. The tree nearby is another example of how time is meaningless in this play. One day the tree appears to be leafless and then the next day is covered with leaves. In “Hamlet,” Hamlet is hesitant to commit the murder of Claudius and finds various reasons to put it off. During all of this, it seems that only a few days have passed, but really months have gone by, showing the unimportance of time. The connections made between these two plays demonstrate the absurd relationship that can be found between them.
Post a Comment