Author: Jesse Starks
Albert Camus calls suicide the most serious philosophical problem – judging whether or not life is worth living. It’s hard to argue with that. After all – once we’re dead – what problem could be more serious?
He elaborates in his essay, The Myth of Sisyphus, suggesting there is no universal meaning in life. Rather than desperately look for one, he urges us to embrace the freedom of realizing this – and live fully on our own terms. This, he suggests, is reason to be happy.
This is “absurdism” in a nutshell – the tension between humanity’s chronic hunt for meaning and a meaningless universe.
After Myth of Sisyphus – I explored absurdism further by watching the play “Waiting for Godot” by Samuel Beckett. It was both unsettling and hilarious.
Fast forward 10 years – Keanu Reeves and Alex Winter (of Bill and Ted’s Excellent Adventure), brought the play to Broadway. I jumped on the chance to attend.
A most excellent prompt for reflection…
Waiting for Godot
Spoiler alert: this is a speed run through the plot followed by light analysis. If you want to watch first, it is posted for free on youtube (and playing now on Broadway).
Act I
Two men, Vladimir and Estragon, are standing by a tree with no leaves. They feel anxious and bored. All we know is they are waiting for some character named “Godot” (Gah-dough) to arrive. Estragon’s foot hurts badly because of an ill-fitting boot, which he complains about before finally removing it. The men half-affectionately bicker and prod each other to pass the time. They flirt with the idea of giving up and going separate ways. They flirt with the idea of killing themselves. But ultimately those options are too uncertain. And so, they carry on waiting…
Suddenly two more men appear. It seems like a master-slave situation. One man, Pozzo, is ordering around another man, Lucky, who is carrying bags and entirely subservient to Pozzo. Pozzo’s energy feels bombastic and arrogant. He is eager to chat with Vlad and Estragon, but hogs the conversation while constantly bossing Lucky around. Lucky doesn’t say a word.
Vlad and Estragon convince Pozzo to let Lucky speak. Unexpectedly, Lucky launches into a speech – sounding impressively intelligent and completely insane all at once. He seems to emphasize the human condition – that mankind relentlessly “wastes and pines”. Humans always seem to be striving for something, but dying at the same time. It feels gloomy and futile.
The speech concludes. Pozzo shares he will soon sell Lucky off as a slave, but oddly, he seems incredibly attached to Lucky, and maybe even dependent upon him for company and knowledge. The dynamic between them is mysterious. Together, they seem to over-intellectualize how the world works, and show signs of codependence.
Pozzo and Lucky leave the scene.
At dusk, a boy shows up who claims to work for Godot. He informs Vlad and Estragon that unfortunately, Godot won’t make it today, but he’ll certainly be here tomorrow. Vlad and Estragon briefly contemplate giving up again, but resign to continue waiting. Night falls.
Act II
A new day. Mysteriously, the tree now has leaves. How much time has passed? We can’t know. Vlad and Estragon recall memories as if they were yesterday – but they may have happened weeks or months ago. They remain bored and anxious, and again, speak with each other to pass the time.
Vlad considers: “what is terrible is to have thought“. Their thoughts seem to be driving them in circles. Then he waffles: “It’s not the worst to have thought” – after all, it entertains them. Then waffles again: “thought – we could have done without it!“.
“We should turn resolutely toward nature!” suggests Estragon. But they’ve already tried that. Like yesterday, they are grasping for distraction, answers, or alternatives to their predicament, but failing to find any.
Vlad suddenly appears clear and confident: “What are we doing here? That is the question! And we are blessed in this, that we happen to know the answer! Yes – in this immense confusion one thing is clear.” This buildup is suspenseful. Something profound is coming. Has Vlad had a major epiphany? “We are waiting for Godot to come.” Apparently not.
Pozzo and Lucky reappear. Interestingly, Pozzo is now blind, and even more dependent on Lucky. Lucky, still carrying all the luggage with a rope around his neck, remains loyal to Pozzo, carefully guiding him.
Asked about his blindness, Pozzo answers: “One day I went blind, one day we’ll go deaf, one day we were born, one day we shall die. They give birth astride of a grave, the light gleams an instant, then it’s night once more.“, reinforcing how short life is, and how certain death is.
They speak a while longer, and go on their way once more.
Like the other day, the boy returns to deliver the same unfortunate news. Godot won’t be making it today, but will certainly come tomorrow. Again, Vlad and Estragon consider giving up. But agree to wait for Godot. “If he comes, we’ll be saved“.
Night falls. Ready to retire for the evening, they ask each other, “Shall we go? Yes. Let’s go.” They remain standing there, reluctant to leave each other’s company. The play ends.
Themes
Life has no universal meaning and we’re going to die.
How can one cope?
Philosophical Suicide
Returning to Camus, this is exactly where suicide becomes a risk. Not only in the physical sense, like when Vlad and Estragon plan to hang themselves, but in the philosophical sense, like when Vlad and Estragon cling to Godot as justification for their existence (“we are blessed we know why we are here – to wait for Godot“). In other words, when Godot comes, they believe “they will be saved”, and this belief directs their lives – even as Godot repeatedly fails to show. This is “philosophical suicide” – i.e. an unreasonable belief that acts like a pacifier for existential anxiety.
In a slightly different form of philosophical suicide, Pozzo and Lucky seem to cling to their ideas and intellect. They seem unjustifiably certain of the way the world works, seeming to belittle humanity’s behavior as futile. Their statements feel only semi-accurate and unreasonably dogmatic.
Thinking and Distraction
Vlad expresses a love/hate relationship with his thoughts. In one hand, it offers him and Estragon a way to entertain and distract each other. In the other hand, it drives them in endless circles – asking questions that they’ve probably asked hundreds of times before.
Who (or What) is Godot?
We know nothing about Godot, other than Vlad and Estragon blindly believe he might come, and that if he does, he will save them.
In one sense, Godot might symbolize universal meaning. There is no universal meaning, but Vlad and Estragon go on waiting for it. It’s an unfulfillable desire.
In another sense, Godot might symbolize ideas or power systems we are indoctrinated into, beyond our control. Godot is a character who seems to control their beliefs and by extension their lives, but he is unreachable, speaking through messengers and making misleading promises. Vlad and Estragon are bound to this opaque system – and cling to it because of no viable alternatives.
Who Godot actually is seems less relevant versus the power he has over Vlad and Estragon, again for seemingly no good reason.
Companionship
Vlad and Estragon, and similarly, Pozzo and Lucky, are happy to have each other. The views and behaviors of each pair may be different, but clearly they all find relief and comfort in their friend’s presence. Their attempts to downplay this are undermined by fear and tender reluctance to separate. Surely this is something we all can relate to – the warmth of human connection in a desert of existence really soothes us.
Knowing Ourselves as an Antidote
Imagine a new character named Savio. Savio recognizes the following:
We Are Not Thoughts
Thoughts are thoughts. They aren’t necessarily accurate or helpful. Savio uses discretion before taking his thoughts seriously, and often ignores them entirely. Vlad, in contrast, seems perpetually haunted by his thoughts. Imagine Vlad being able to step away from them occasionally? What relief and perspective that might bring.
Knowledge, Ideas, and Philosophical Suicide
What can Savio know to be absolutely true? “I think therefore I am”, surely. Beyond that, Savio applies skepticism and towards his ideas and beliefs. Ideas rule our lives – but often these ideas fall apart under scrutiny. Savio doesn’t wait for Godot, because it requires an unreasonable leap of faith. Savio is protected from “philosophical suicide” and prefers decisions more grounded in truth.
Boredom
“Bliss—a-second-by-second joy and gratitude at the gift of being alive, conscious—lies on the other side of crushing, crushing boredom.”
David Foster Wallace
Boredom drove Vlad and Estragon crazy “We are bored. No, don’t protest, we are bored to death, there’s no denying it!”. Savio uses boredom as a trigger for equanimity as opposed to a compulsive need for distraction.
Comfort in Solitude
Savio deeply appreciates the significance of human connection, but at the same time, he realizes we are our own best friend. He embodies the peace of Thoreau at Walden. He embodies the words of Derek Walcott:
“The time will come when, with elation, you will greet yourself arriving at your own door, in your own mirror and each will smile at the other’s welcome, and say, sit here. Eat.
You will love again the stranger who was your self. Give wine. Give bread. Give back your heart to itself, to the stranger who has loved you.”
Savio knows self-companionship has a role to play in easing existential anxiety.
Meaning
There is no universal meaning to life. Rather than despair, Savio is glad to realize this – it unshackles him from any prescribed way to live. No matter what culture urges him to do, he is free to choose. He relies on his rationality and intuition to guide his moral compass, but also recognizes their limits. Life is mind-bogglingly mysterious, and he appreciates the experience without needing some grand justification for it all.
Savio Knows Himself
All of these insights, among others, emerged in Savio’s Self-Investigation. While existential dread and anxiety cannot be extinguished, Savio’s clarity and contemplation add several dimensions of resilience and perspective.
Summary
Waiting for Godot is famously confusing. It can feel like two hours of uncertainty that ends abruptly without resolution. Beckett refused to explain anything. This makes for a true Rorschach experience – an ink blot where we see whatever we see.
Certain themes are clear, though. Life is short, death is certain, and we don’t know why we are here. Vlad, Estragon, Pozzo, and Lucky each dealt with this in relatable ways, which forces us to consider how anyone might cope with these circumstances.
Ultimately we are all in their shoes.
Why Are We Here?
We don’t know. And it’s totally OK.
Cherish what this is, in a way that feels deeply meaningful, for as long as you can.
Hopefully, Vlad and Estragon realize this. Until then, at least they have each other.
(While not the main focus of this article, the rendition currently on Broadway was incredible. The talent and chemistry of the cast, the subtle dialogue tweaks, the sound and visual effects. I’ve only seen a handful of plays in my life, this was by far was my favorite.)
Discussion
This is posted to reddit for voting and discussion.
Why Are We Here? Waiting for Godot.
byu/JesseNof1 inSelfInvestigation