Tuesday, May 26, 2015

Waiting For Godot Literary Terms

Do all elements of the story work together to support a central purpose? Is any part irrelevant or inappropriate?
If as I state in the next question the purpose is indeed the utter meaninglessness of life, then I think the various elements of the story work together perfectly to accomplish this. The repetitive speech, actions, people, and even nature of the acts all lend themselves to this purpose. Various little details that seem as thought they should have some meaning, but don’t, also help build up this theme of meaninglessness.

In reading the second question, at first I thought that the various characters and their unexplained circumstances seemed inappropriate to prove this theme, but upon further inspection, I see that these confusing circumstances only aid the hopelessness of life portrayed in Waiting for Godot.

What do you conceive to be the story’s central purpose? How fully has it achieved that purpose?
I’m sure some of you might get mad at me for saying this, but I found it really hard to find a purpose to this play. Life is dismal for everyone in the play, from Vladimir and Estragon to the abused slave (ironically named Lucky) and his master Pozzo. I would say the central purpose of the play is to prove the utter meaninglessness of life because that is really all I got out of it. If you have any other opinions feel free to comment!

What effect does the ending have on the readers of Godot?

Waiting for Godot most certainly has a indeterminate ending! It ends in the same repetitive way that the first act ends. Leaving the readers wondering what will become of the characters and their endless waiting. The characters are essentially in the same place that they were at the beginning of the book, if not in a worse position, leaving readers with a sense of hopelessness.