Waiting for Godot #4

Vladimir: We'll hang ourselves tomorrow. Unless Godot comes.
Estragon: And if he comes?
Vladimir: We'll be saved.
Vladimir: Well? Shall we go?
Estragon: Yes, let's go.
They do not move.


When the boy arrives again in Act II, Vladimir seems to already knows what he will say. This suggests that this dialogue has occurred many times before and further show the repetition of the play is endless and the play itself is simply a scene from the cycle of their lives. The play's conclusion echoes the end of Act I. The stage directions are even similar. After the boy leaves, the stage directions say "as in Act I, Vladimir stands motionless and bowed." This shows that Beckett intended to make some aspects exactly like that of prior events.
The repetition of the final two lines at both act's conclusions convey the important role of parallelism. The character's lines are switched from the previous act, suggests that despite their differences, Vladimir and Estragon are really the same. Also it shows that they try to fight their constant cycle of life, but trying to change things subconsciously.
This shows the absurdity of the play. It shows how life really has no meaning and is just one repetitive cycle. The entire play consists of two men standing around waiting for someone else. They have no definite reason for waiting for Godot and they fail to try and change their faith. It shows how humans want their lives to be unique and have meaning, but they don't put the effort to do so and their surroundings make it so that the meaningless of life overtake any desire to change.

Waiting for Godot #3

Vladimir: Christ! What has Christ got to do with it? You're not going to compare yourself to Christ!
Estragon: All my life I've compared myself to him.
Vladimir: To-morrow everything will be better.
Estragon: How do you make that out?
Vladimir: Did you not hear what the child said?
Estragon: No. He said hat Godot was sure to come to-morrow.


The fact that Estragon compares himself to Christ acts to diminish the image of religion as a whole. Also, it shows that he, if not both of them, are not very religious or have poor judgement. Therefore, it shows that their view of Godot may be exaggerated or simply false. If they view Christ as the same as a man, they could view Godot as greater than one.

Vladimir's statement that he pretended not to recognize Pozzo and Lucky prior suggests that he has met them before. This indicates that the actions presented in the first act of the play may have happened before, calling attention to events that occur outside the frame of the play. The same thing occurs when Vladimir asks the boy if he came yesterday, revealing that they were waiting yesterday with the same result. This suggests that the same events have been going on for some time, therefore the two acts of the play are merely two instances in a long pattern of ceaselessly repeating events. This use of syntaxical and event repetition conveys time and how everything is connect and actually all the same. The play is a mircocosm for life and the fight against man and society. The end of Act I establishes Vladimir and Estragon's hopelessness. Even when they both agree to go, and Vladimir says "Yes, let's go," the two men do not move. Even their resolution to go is not strong enough to produce action. This inability to act renders Vladimir and Estragon unable to determine their own fates. Instead of acting, they can only wait for someone or something to act upon them.

Waiting for Godot #2

Estragon: You're not Mr. Godot Sir?
Pozzo: I am Pozzo! Pozzo! Does that name mean nothing to you?
Estragon: Bozzo...Bozzo
Pozzo: PPPOZZZO!
Estragon: Pozzo...no...I don't seem to...
Vladimir: I once knew a family called Gozzo. The mother had the clap.
Estragon: We're not from these parts.
Pozzo: You are human beings none the less. As far as one can see. Of the same species as myself.


The introduction of Pozzo and Lucky act both as parallel to Estragon and Vladimir and drives the plays use of repeatition and confusion. In this passage itself, Vladimir and Estragon view Godot as the important figure, while Pozzo and Lucky view Pozzo as the important figure. However neither opposite group agree with the other views, which convey the confusion in position in the world and knowledge. It seems that Estragon and Vladimir represent humanity as they are two of the few characters in the play. Also, when Pozzo first enters, he notes that Vladimir and Estragon are of the same species as he is, "made in God's image." Later, when Pozzo asks Estragon what his name is, he replies "Adam." This comparison of Estragon to Adam, the first man, suggests that he may represent all of mankind and this link between Estragon and Adam also relates to the idea of Godot as God.
Repetition of events in the play is emphasized even more by textual repetition. When Vladimir and Estragon alternate short lines back and forth, Estragon often repeats himself at the end of a string of lines. This occurs for the first time when they go,
Estragon: The circus.
Vladimir: The music-hall.
Estragon: The circus.

Waiting for Godot #1

Estragon: If he came yesterday and we weren't here you may be sure he won't come again to-day.
Vladimir: But you say we were here yesterday.
Estragon: I may be mistaken.

Vladimir: I felt lonely.
Estragn: I had a dream.
Vladimir: Don't tell me!

Estragon: There are times when I wonder if it wouldn't be better for us to part.
Vladimir: You wouldn't go far.

The play begins with these two characters. The beginning of the play is dedicated to the display of Vladimir and Estragon's character and relationship. Vladimir is the leader, however they are both depended on each other. This dependency extends even to minute, everyday things, as Estragon cannot even take off his boot without help from Vladimir. One of the characters often repeats a line that the other has previously said. This textual repetition could show how their lives seem to repeat as they seem to wait for Godot everyday.

The repetitiveness of the play is best illustrated by Estragon's repeated requests to leave, which are followed each time by Vladimir telling him that they cannot leave because they are waiting for Godot. The exact repetition of the lines each time this dialogue appears, including the stage directions, reinforces the idea that the same actions occur over and over again and suggests that these actions happen more times than the play presents.

In this beginning section, the nature of Vladimir and Estragon's relationship with Godot reminds me of the beginning of Great Gatspy. He is protrayed as a super important figure and he is defined as a character before he even makes an appearance in the play.
They mention that they asked Godot for "a kind of prayer...a vague supplication," which he is currently considering. This creates a parallel between Godot and God, also suggested by their similar names, and it seems that Vladimir and Estragon do consider Godot a kind of religious figure when they mention coming in on their hands and knees.

Leaves of Grass #7

Do I contradict myself?
Very well...I contradict myself;
I am large... I contain multitudes.

I concentrate toward them that are nigh...I wait on the door-slab.
Who has done his day's work and will soonest be through with his supper?
Who wishes to walk with me?
Will you speak before I am gone? Will you prove already too late?
The spotted hawk swoops by and accuses me...he complains of my gab and my loitering.

I too am a bit tamed... I too am untranslatable.
I sound my barbaric yawp over the roofs of the world.

What I find very interesting was what Whitman says before, "Listener up there! Here you...what have you to confine me?" He wants to hear what the reader has to say. He wants to know another's opinion, but at the same time, he values his own opinion and believes it. He is willing to listen to others, but not take in consideration their full opinion.
When he says if he contradicts himself, he is realizing what he has been doing throughout the poems. He takes two sides to things to fully understand things, therefore although he is contradictory, he is aware and realistic. That is why he then says that he contains multitude. He has many perspectives even the ones he doesn't believe.

As Whitman continues to state how he is loitering and how he is being accused of such a thing. The world around he do not like that he isn't simply looking for answers, he is looking for more. And that is something a human can not have. To have such a high understanding would make him more than human. When he's yelling at the listener, he is yelling at the sky, therefore he's yelling at God. The reader and God are both the listeners to Whitman, therefore in a sense, he is having an argument with God. He is fighting the aspect of knowing too much. The hawk represents God's messenger as nature is looking down at Whitman. The struggle of knowledge and its journey towards discovery is a major theme and deeply conveyed in the passage.

Leaves of Grass #6

All doctrines, all politics and civilization exuge from you.
All sculpture and monuments and anything inscribed anywhere are tallied in you,
The gist of histories and statistics as far back as the records reach is in you this hour-and myths and tales the same;
If you were not breathing and walking here where would they all be?
The most renowned poems would be ashes... orations and plays would be vacuums.

All architecture is what you do to it when you look at it;
Did you think it was in the white or gray stone? or the lines of the aches and cornices?

All music is what awakens from you are reminded by the instruments,
It is not the violins and the cornets...it is not the oboe nor the beating drums-nor the notes of the baritone singer singing his sweet romanza... nor those of the men's chorus, nor those of the women's chorus,
It is nearer and farther than they.

What Whitman is describing in these passages is the power of opinion. He is saying how everything is determined by what others believe of it. Without people to acknowledge it, nothing in the world would have meaning. He creates a very close relationship with the reader as he addresses them directly with "you". He is telling the reader that without them, this book like all others would have no power; no purpose.
He continues his argument discussing architecture and music. He gives ultimate power to opinions because he says things are titled by what feelings they created, not what they are.The identity of things aren't what they are composed of, but rather what they create.
I absolutely agree with what Whitman is saying, but just reading made me realize how powerful what people believe has on things.
I related this to our class discussions on reader response criticism.
Whitman says, "The most renowned poems would be ashes." Without the opinion of others, a book would mean nothing. I mean is not criticism an opinion itself?

Leaves of Grass #5

"I am the hounded slave...I wince at the bite of the dogs,
Hell and despair are upon me...crack and again crack on marksmen.
I clutch the rails of the fence...my gore dribs thinned with the ooze of my skin,
I fall on the weeds and stones,
The riders spur their unwilling horses and haul close,
They taunt my dizzy ears...they beat me violently over the head with their whip-stocks."

For many of the poems, Whitman has been the observer. However in this section, he has become the things that he is observing. He becomes the wife, then the man, and finally the slave. By him becoming them, he understands who they are and what they have to go through. This gain of understanding is what Whitman has been looking for and in a sense is his epiphany because he now has the awareness he's been looking for.

The passage above begins with him finally realizing the place of a slave, which is the harder for him to understand because it's the farthest to what he was. He has understand the position so much that he can feel the pain that a slave feels. "My core dribs thinned with the ooze of my skin" is an example of his realization. After, he says, "I do not ask the wounded person how he feels... I myself become the wounded person. In this area, he syntactically favors describing himself, follow by an ellipsis, and then something occurring to him. This has an interesting effect because it parallels the slave or his characteristics with what is occurring with it, but at the same time dividing them. This paradox expresses the complexity of the social issues at the time and the tough life of a slave.