"Waiting for Godot" in the Theater of Absurd and Existentialism View

Waiting for Godot is the one of the work of Samuel Beckett in the literary works which is classified into the theater of absurd. It will be reasonable if the definition of theater absurd is compared by the intrinsic even the essence of the play Waiting for Godot. First, the definition of absurd is “out of harmony” in a musical context. In different sentence, absurd also meaning “ridiculous” which is devoid of purpose relating to all character’s actions are useless, meaningless, and absurd. It also means that the theater of absurd has divorced the actor and his setting which is shown the feeling of absurdity.

In the same time, the play of Waiting for Godot also has this idea. One idea is coming from the divorce between the actor and the setting. It can be found when this play does not have the intrinsic aspect building the play from the inside completely even this play also break the rules of creating the literary works traditionally. In addition, the character of Vladimir and Estragon also can be the example of absurd because those characters are waiting a useless wish, Godot who will give them everything. From their dialog, it is mentioned that they wait for Godot even though their appointment with him is by no means certain (page 18). Extremely, Jerome (2008) says that it is sometimes referred to as “the play where nothing happens.” Then, it is quite clear that the play of Beckett’s work is admitted as the theater of absurd.

Another approach to view this play is existentialism. Some of researches such as Jean Paul Sartre, Albert Camus, and Martin Heidegger do not have the sharp definition about this word. They only give some characteristics about the word to show the meaning of existentialism that can be concluded by the writer into 2 things. The first is freewill and the second is the existence of human is earlier that the essence of human. In this play, Estragon and Vladimir could not evade a bad faith and do not have right to build their own essence because they are tied by the order with Godot even Estragon and Vladimir also need each other. It means that the word of freewill (individual) to do anything is nonsense here. Then, in the page 62 shows that they are incapable of keeping silent. In contrary, Beckett used a lot of words “silence”.

Then, the writer indicates that those characters do not want to hear an anguish and suffering of people in the past. In the dialog Estragon called that voice as the dead voice which was like leaves and it talked about their lives. It can be interpreted that they could not avoid caring about the condition of human. The last is they also think about their future that depends on the character of Godot which is a symbol of God. This opinion is reasonable to break the existentialism in this play, because the existentialism here defines that human lives to face their life and finds their essential of life. When Estragon and Vladimir pretend that their life is senselessness, they wait for Godot to solve their problem.

Finally, those evidences are quite clear that this play is included the theater of absurd but it cannot be identified using an approach of existentialism like Bob Carbett says about being and nothingness. Being in the existentialism is about the word I as the central of the actions. Then, nothingness is about the different of one human form other human about their existing. If they are the same, it means they do not exist. Significantly, the order of existentialism does not require that the duty of human in this world is to face the human condition as a recognition that at the root of our being there is nothingness. (M. Hisyam Maliki)